(1.) Since these two appeals are arising out of the same crime number and against the order of acquittal made in S.C.No.137 of 2015 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Ramanathapuram, these two appeals are taken up together for hearing and disposed of by way of this common judgment.
(2.) The accused persons A1 to A13 in S.C.No.137 of 2015 were charged for the offences under Ss. 120(b), 364, 364 r/w 34, 302, 201, 404, 201 r/w 109, 201 r/w 34 and 302 r/w 34 IPC. After examination of all witnesses and evidence, the accused were acquitted by the trial Court. Hence, challenging the same, these two appeals were filed by the defacto complainant and the State respectively.
(3.) (i). Brief facts of the prosecution case : The defacto complainant preferred a complaint alleging that her daughter deceased Aathila Banu, a muslim lady entered into love marriage with one Muthusamy, Hindu belonging to the Scheduled Caste Community as per the Muslim customs and in the wedlock, the deceased children viz., Ajira Banu(5 years) and Mohammed Aslam(7 years)were born to them. The said Muthusamy was a star witness in the murder of one Roseline, who was a relative of A-11's son-in-law. But the said Muthusamy did not support the case and was declared as hostile. In the result, the said case ended in acquittal.