(1.) Paulraj, the appellant herein for having committed the murder of his wife by pouring kerosene and setting fire to her was convicted for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. Challenging the same, this appeal has been filed.
(2.) The facts leading to the conviction are as follows: "
(3.) Mr.S.Shanmugavelayutham, learned counsel appearing for the appellant would take us through the evidence and contend that the evidence available on record would not indicate that there is a direct evidence to prove the offence as against the accused and the oral evidence spoken to by P.Ws.1, 3 and 4 cannot be accepted, in view of the fact that the same is not in consonance with the dying declaration given by the deceased to P.W.2-Jusdicial Magistrate. Furthermore, P.Ws.1, 3 and 4 having known about the involvement of the accused in the incident four days earlier, had kept quiet and P.W.1 gave a complaint to P.W.9 Sub Inspector of Police only on 25.08.1993 and no proper explanation was given on the side of the prosecution for the delay in lodging the complaint and as such, the case of the prosecution with reference to the involvement of the accused in the incident, which is belatedly given is false and as such, the accused is liable to be acquitted.