JEYAPRAKASH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Appeal has been filed by the appellant / sole accused as against the conviction and sentence, dtd. 21/12/2018, made in S.C.No.145 of 2017, by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Theni @ Periyakulam.

(2.) The brief facts of the prosecution case is as follows:

(3.) It is the main contention of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant that the entire case is based on circumstantial evidence and the prosecution has not proved all the circumstances conclusively. The very FIR that has been filed by the owner of the land-P.W.1 would indicate that the husband was the suspect. Thereafter, the final report has been filed against the present accused, who was working in the neighbouring land. He further submits that in order to prove the guilt of the accused, the circumstances relied upon by the prosecution are highly improbable and unbelievable. The alleged extra-judicial confession is not reliable and no such confession was reduced in writing by P.W.4-VAO. Only the Special report of the VAO is sought to be relied upon by the prosecution as extrajudicial confession.