PALANISAMY Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants in this appeal are A. 1, A. 3 and A. 4 in S. C. No: 31 of 2001 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court No: 1) Salem. A. 2 was put up for trial along with the appellants and he died pending trial and therefore, the charge against him stood abated. For convenience sake, in this judgment we will refer the appellants in the same rank in which they were put up for trial before the Court of Sessions. Heard Mr. V. Gopinath, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants and Mr. V. Arulraj, learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) for the State.

(2.) THE charges framed by the learned Sessions Judge against the accused are as hereunder: 302 I. P. C.- A. 2 for having caused the death of Rangannan (hereinafter referred to as D. 1)302 r/w 34 - A. 1 for having caused the death of Rangannan (D. 1)302 r/w 109 - against A. 3 and A. 4 regarding the murder of Rangannan (D. 1)302 r/w 34 - against A. 1, A. 3 and A. 4 for having caused the death of Selva Kumar (hereinafter referred to as D. 2)302 r/w 109 - against A. 2 regarding the death of Selva Kumar (D. 2)325 - against A. 2 for having caused injuries on P. W. 1

(3.) THE prosecution examined, in support of their case, as many as 17 witnesses as P. Ws. 1 to 17 and marked 37 exhibits as Exs. P. 1 to P. 37. The defence did not let in either oral or documentary evidence. At the end of the trial, the learned Sessions Judge accepted the case of the prosecution and found the first accused guilty of the offence under Section 302 read with 34 I. P. C. , for causing the murder of Rangannan (D. 1), for which he stands sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life together with a fine of Rs. 1,000/- carrying a default sentence; accused 1, 3 and 4 guilty for the offence under Section 302 read with 34 I. P. C. , for causing the murder of Selva Kumar (D. 2), and sentenced each one of them to undergo imprisonment for life together with a fine of Rs. 1,000/- carrying a default sentence. For the rest of the charges the accused were acquitted. It is this judgment which is in challenge in this appeal.