(1.) Challenge is made to the judgment of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur passed in S.C. No.179 of 2008 on 05.10.2009, whereby the sole accused / appellant stood charged, tried and found guilty under Sections 302, 452, 326 and 324 IPC and imposed punishment of life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.1000/- and default sentence under Section 302 IPC, 1 year R.I. with a fine of Rs.500/- and default sentence under Section 452 IPC, 2 years R.I. for each count with a fine of Rs.500/- and default sentence for each count under Section 326 IPC (2 counts) and 1 year R.I. for each count under Section 324 IPC (4 counts).
(2.) The short facts that are necessary for the disposal of these appeals can be stated as follows:-
(3.) Advancing arguments on behalf of the accused / appellant, the learned counsel would submit that, in the instant case, the occurrence has taken place at 3 stages. The deceased-Ananjiammal, after returning from the nature's call, was actually attacked by the accused / appellant, for which the prosecution has examined P.Ws.1 and 7 as eye-witnesses in respect of first part of the occurrence, for which the learned Trial Judge was not ready to believe the evidence of P.W.7 and thus, what was available for the prosecution in respect of the first part of the occurrence was only the evidence of P.W.1. Learned counsel for the accused / appellant further added that insofar as the evidence of P.W.1 is concerned, the Trial Judge should not have rejected the evidence of P.W.1 for more reasons than one. According to P.W.1, when the deceased was coming after attending the nature's call, she was attacked and killed by the accused, but in Ex.P16-Post Mortem Certificate, it has been stated that the large intestine of the deceased was filled with faecal matter and hence, according to the learned counsel, it would be indicative of the fact that there are contradictions between the evidence of P.W.1 and the medical evidence.