KUMARESAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH these Criminal Revision Cases arise out of the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 10.5.2007 in Crl.A.Nos.219 and 223 of 2006 respectively, on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Court (Fast Track Court), Vellore, confirming the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 9.11.2006 in C.C.No.249 of 2002 on the file of the Additional District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate's Court, Ambur.

(2.) THE petitioners/A1 and A2 were convicted for the offence under Section 341 IPC and each sentenced to fine of Rs.500/- in default, to undergo three months' simple imprisonment and also convicted for the offence under Section 394 IPC and each sentenced to undergo two years' rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- each, in default, to undergo six months' simple imprisonment. THEy were acquitted of the charge under Section 506 (Part 2) IPC.

(3.) CHALLENGING the conviction and sentence imposed by the Courts below, learned counsel for the revision petitioners/A1 and A2 put forth the following contentions: (i) The investigating officer has not been examined and his examination was dispensed with. (ii) P.Ws.2, 3 and 6 who are the eye-witnesse and P.W.5 one of the attestors to the confession statement, turned hostile. (iii) There is no corroboration for the oral evidence of P.W.1, who is the stock witness, doing work at Umrabath Police Station and having house opposite to the said Police Station and his evidence cannot be relied upon. (iv) The recovery of material objects under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, has not been done in accordance with law. The trial Court and the appellate Court did not consider all these aspects in proper perspective and hence, he prayed for the acquittal of the revision petitioners/A1 and A2 and for allowing the Crl.R.Cs.