NARAYANAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant in Crl.A.No.265 of 2018 is A-1 and the appellant in Crl.A.No.783 of 2018 is A-2, in S.C.No.164 of 2015 on the file of the Second Additional District and Sessions Court, Tiruppur. The trial Court framed charges against the appellant/A1 under Sections 294(b) , 302 and 307 read with 34 IPC and against the appellant/A2 under Sections 294(b) , 307 and 302 read with 34 IPC . By judgment dated 23.06.2017, the trial Court while acquitting A-1 of the charge under Section 294(b) IPC, convicted A1 and A2 as follows: Rank of Conviction Sentence with fine Accused Life imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/-, in (i) Section 302 IPC default, to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment A1 ten years rigorous imprisonment with fine of (ii) Section 307 read with 34 IPC Rs.5,000/-, in default, to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment fine of Rs.500/-, in default, to undergo one (i) Section 294(b) IPC month simple imprisonment ten years rigorous imprisonment with fine of A2 (ii) Section 307 IPC Rs.5,000/-, in default, to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment (iii) Section 302 read with 34 IPC Life imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment. The sentences imposed on the appellants/A1 and A2 were directed by the trial Court to run concurrently.

(2.) The case of the prosecution as put forth by its witnesses, is consciously narrated below:

(3.) The learned counsel for the appellants/A1 and A2 submitted that there are lot of contradictions in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses and those contradictions would prove that the occurrence could not have happened in the manner as put forth by the prosecution. In support of the said submission, the learned counsel for the appellants/A1 and A2 took this Court to the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. According to the learned counsel for the appellant/A1 P.W.1 was attacked with the wooden logs by A2 and deceased was attacked with wooden logs by A1. But in the accident register Ex.P-11 pertaining to the deceased, it is stated that the deceased was attacked by three unknown persons. P.W.6 Doctor who admitted P.W.1 in the hospital, admitted in his cross-examination that the deceased informed him at the time of admission that he was attacked by three unknown persons. The evidence of P.W.6 Doctor clearly shows that P.W.1 and the deceased were attacked by three unknown persons. In this regard, the learned counsel for the appellant/A1 invited the attention of this Court to Ex.P-12 accident register copy pertaining to P.W.1, wherein it was recorded that P.W.1 had received cut injury. Even in the cross-examination of P.W.6, it is stated that the cut injury could be caused only with the knife or sharp weapon and thus, it is clear that the injury was not caused by wooden logs, as projected by the prosecution.