MAYAKANNAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge is made to the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Division, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur made in S.C. No. 11 of 2008, whereby the sole accused/appellant stood charged, tried and found guilty under Sections 449,302 and 394 IPC and he was awarded punishment of 10 years R.I. with fine and default sentence for the first charge; life imprisonment with fine and default sentence for the second charge of murder and 10 years R.I. with fine and default sentence for the third charge.

(2.) The short facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal can be stated thus:

(3.) Advancing arguments on behalf of the appellant the learned counsel, Mr. T. Muruganantham, would submit that in the instant case, according to the prosecution, the occurrence has taken place at 1.45 p.m. on 6.6.2007, and the prosecution has no direct evidence to prove the same. The learned counsel further added that the only witness who was examined to speak to the fact that he witnessed the accused climbing down from the house by a pipe is P.W.4. Though he gave a statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. before the learned Judicial Magistrate, he has turned hostile, and hence, direct evidence was not available for the prosecution. The prosecution rested its case only on the recovery of the materials objects, which, according to the witnesses, were worn by the deceased during the relevant time. When Exhibit P-1 complaint was perused, it did not indicate what was the money actually stolen at the time of the occurrence. But, a sum of Rs. 1210/- was recovered from the accused/appellant as if it was a part of the stolen money. Thus, there is no evidence to indicate that it was the stolen money.