SELVAM AND ORS. Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants are the accused 1 to 3 in S.C. No. 4 of 2009 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Sivagangai. Totally there were five accused in this case. The trial Court framed as many as eight charges against them as detailed below;

(2.) When the above incriminating materials were put to the accused under Sec. 313 of Cr.P.C., they denied the same. On their side, three witnesses were examined as D.Ws. 1 to 3 and ten documents were marked as Exs. D1 to D10. DW 1 has stated that he is a resident of Nattarpatti Village and he had acquaintance only with the first accused. He has further stated that one Mr. Kandasamy had mortgaged his property to him. Then, Mr. Kandasamy redeemed the property in the presence of the first accused. Ex. D6 is the receipt for the discharge of the mortgage, which contained the signature of the first accused also. DW 2 is the Branch Manager of the Indian Overseas Bank at Puzhuthipatti. According to him, on 27.03.2010 under Loan No. 4314/2007, the first accused had pledged jewels for Rs. 65,000/ - under Ex. D7 receipt. Again, on 09.03.2010 he pledged few more jewels under loan No. 952/2010 for a sum of Rs. 55,000/ - under Ex. D8 receipt. He has further stated that what had happened to the jewels pledged under Exs. D7 and D8 cannot be said by him as he had not brought records to the Court. During cross examination, he has submitted that as per Ex. P26, the loan Ledger on 23.08.2007, the first accused had pledged nine items of gold jewels for Rs. 57,000/ -. DW 3 is a resident of Chinnamarungi Village, which is situated two kilometers away from Puzhuthipatti. He is the brother of Mr. Kandasamy, who had earlier mortgaged the land to DW 1. He has stated that under Ex. D6, the mortgage was discharged. He has further stated that the house of the deceased was a lonely house in the midst of a field to which there was no approach road. Therefore, according to him, no one can go to the house of the deceased by motorcycle. He has further stated that on the night intervening 22.08.2007 and 23.08.2007, there was no cinema exhibited in the village, as it is claimed by PW 12. PW 12 is his own brother. He has stated that on 22.08.2007, on the whole night, PW 12 was only at his house.

(3.) The defence taken by the first accused was that MOs. 1 to 8 belong to him and they did not belong to the deceased at all. He has further stated that M.Os. 1 to 8 were pledged by him in the Bank for the purpose of raising funds for purchasing land from Mr. Kandasamy. These jewels (M.Os. 1 to 8) were recovered by the Police in connection with the case as if they were stolen articles. All the accused had denied that they committed the crime as charged.