R SHANMUGAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenging the judg-i&ent of the learned Additional District Sessions Judge (Fast Tract Court No. 2), Coimbatore made in S. C. No. 356 of 2001, wherein the sole accused/appellant stood charged, tried and found guilty under Section 392 r/w 397 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo 7 years R. I., this appeal has been filed by the appellant.

(2.) The short facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal can be stated as follows: P.W.I, Dhilipkumar, is a resident of Nanjundapuram, Pothanoor, Coimbatore, On 27-10-2000 at about 6.45 p.m., when he was proceeding to his house in his scooter at Pothanoor Main Road, he was suddenly stopped by the accused. The appellant/accused showed M.O.2 knife and asked him to take money what he had. But, P.W. 1 informed that he had no money. The accused forcibly snatched M.O. 1 watch from his wrist. On hearing the alarm, PWs. 2 and 3. who witnessed the occurrence, made their attempt to chase the accused and tried to apprehend him, but they could not. P.W. 1 went to Pothanoor Police Station at about 7.30 p.m. on the same day and lodged a complaint Ex. P. 1, on the strength of which, P.W. 6, Sub Inspector of Police, registered a case in Crime No. 622 of 2000 under Section 392 r/w 506 (ii) I.P.C. and prepared Ex. P. 5, F.I.R. P.W. 7, Inspector of Police took up investigation, proceeded to the spot at about 8.00 p.m. and prepared Ex. P.4 Observation Mahazar in the presence of the witnesses, namely, P.W. 5 and one Rajavelu. He prepared Ex. P. 6 Rough sketch also. He examined the witnesses and recorded their statements. On 28-10-2000 at about 5.30 a.m. he arrested the accused. The accused volunteered to give a confessional statement in the presence of the witnesses. Pursuant to the confessional statement given by the accused/appellant, he produced M.O. 1 writs watch and M.O. 2 knife, which were recovered in the presence of the witnesses, namely, P.W. 4 and one Paulraj under Ex. P. 3 Mahazar. The accused was remanded to judicial custody and the M.Os were sent to the concerned Court. On completion of investigation, P.W. 7, Inspector of Police filed a charge sheet against the accused under Section 392 r/w 397 I.P.C.

(3.) In order to prove the case, the prosecution has examined 7 witnesses and marked 6 exhibits and 2 material objects. On completion of evidence on the side of prosecution, the accused was questioned under Section 313 of Cr. P.C. as to the in criminating circumstances found in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, which the accused flatly denied as false. No defence witnesses were examined. The lower Court, after consideration of the rival submissions and scrutiny of the materials available, has found the accused guilty under Section 392 r/w 397 I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment as stated above. Aggrieved appellant has brought forth this appeal.