SENTHILUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals have been filed by A1 to A3 against the judgment of the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tuticorin, made in SC No. 369/2015 dtd. 13/9/2019, convicting and sentencing them in the following manner:

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that the accused persons were involved in the business of selling pork and they seem to have created pollution in the locality, while burning the pigs. The people living in the locality had complained about the same and the accused persons did not heed to their request. Ultimately, P.W.6 had complained about this to deceased Murugan (D1) and Balamurugan (D2) and they, in turn, complained to the local body and a police complaint was also given in this regard. An inspection was also conducted by the Inspector belonging to the local body and the accused persons were also called to the police station on 24/10/2013 and were warned. This incident was projected as the motive by the prosecution and had developed enmity against the deceased persons.

(3.) To prove the case, the prosecution examined P.W.1 to P.W.27 and marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P18, besides M.O.1 to M.O.23. The incriminating materials were put to the accused persons, while questioning them under Sec. 313 (1) (b) Cr.P.C. and they denied the same as false.