EASWARI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY our judgment dated 31.7.1991 we set aside the conviction of the appellant and directed her acquittal. We then observed, that the reasons which impelled us to acquit the appellant, would follow in due course. We further stated that the detailed judgment would include the nature of action, if any, to be taken, against P.W.13 Gopal, the then Inspector of Police, Mettupalayam who prime facie appears to have intentionally given false evidence and, or fabricated such evidence in the course of the Judicial proceedings.

(2.) HERE are our reasons for the decision arrived at on 31.7.1991.

(3.) ABOUT a month prior to occurrence, P.W.1 requested the appellant to part with her jewellery to facilitate matrimony of the deceased. P.W.1 also told his wife (Appellant) that the house property in the name of his parents, should be settled in favour of the deceased. The appellant not only refused to part with her jewellery, but also protested against the intended settlement of the ancestral property of her husband in favour of the deceased. However, P.W.1 left the village after informing the appellant, that within 2 months thereafter, the marriage of the deceased had to be performed.