AJI MOHAMMED Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE accused, who suffered conviction in the hands of the lower Court for the offences under Sections 307 and 302 I. P. C. , and sentenced to undergo R. I. for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to undergo further R. I. for six months and to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to undergo further R. I. for six months, respectively, for the above said offences, is the appellant.

(2.) ON 16. 6. 2001 at about 10. 30 a. m. , the accused had some dispute with Mayavelu (P. W. 1) and Ilayaraja (the deceased ). The accused not only assaulted P. W. 1 aiming his life, but also stabbed Ilayaraja, taking away his life prematurely. ON complaint, after investigation, since the offences had been made out, the respondent police had filed a final report against the accused under Sections 307 and 302 I. P. C.

(3.) THE learned Government Advocate, opposing the above arguments submitted, that there is no material to indicate, that the previous first information report has been suppressed, which should follow, no doubt would arise, regarding the genesis of the case. It is the further submission of the learned Government Advocate, that the oral evidence of P. Ws. 1 to 3 are cogent, convincing and in fact, one of the witnesses is an independent witness and to ignore the oral testimony of P. Ws. 1 to 3, nothing has been brought out during cross-examination, which should follow, the evidence should be accepted as such, as rightly did by the trial Court. He further argued, that the accused has not sustained any injury and therefore, the non explanation for the imaginary injury is not fatal to the prosecution. In this way, supporting the reasonings given by the trial Court and opposing the above arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant, he pleaded for confirmation of the findings of the trial Court.