RAMESHKUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is preferred by A1/appellant herein, challenging the conviction and sentence passed by the learned Additional District and Session Court (Fast Track court No.5) Thiruppur made in S.C.No.67/2001 by the judgment dated 22.7.2002, convicting the appellant/A1 along with A2 for the offence under Sections 392 IPC and sentenced each of them to undergo 7 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default to undergo 2 months rigorous imprisonment and sentenced them to 7 years rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 397 IPC and both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) VERIFICATION from the registry discloses that A2, Selvaraj @ Selvan has not preferred any appeal. There are totally three accused. A3, Krishnankutty @ Shakul @ Shakul Hameed died before the commencement of the trial. Therefore, A1, the appellant and A2 faced trial before the Trial Court.

(3.) MR. M. K. Subramanian, learned counsel appearing for the appellant vehemently contended that the prosecution miserably failed to prove its case by adducing clear and consistent evidence. It is contended that, there is inordinate delay in giving report to the police as the occurrence said to have taken place on 19.6.2000 at 6.30 p.m. whereas the report was given to the police only on the next day i.e., 20.6.2000 at 6.30 a.m. It is submitted that, there is no explanation for such inordinate delay. It is further contended that, as per the admission of PW2 in the cross examination, he has also given a report to the police, but the same was suppressed by the prosecution.