RAMKUMAR Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE sole accused in S.C.No. 88 of 2006, stood charged and tried for the commission of the offences under Section 302 and 323 I.P.C. The Court of the Principal Sessions Judge, Dindigul, vide judgment dated 21.04.2007, has convicted the appellant/accused under Section 304 -II I.P.C and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/ - with default sentence of rigorous imprisonment for three months and for the commission of the offence under Section 323 I.P.C., sentence him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/ - with default sentence of simple imprisonment for three months. The trial Court further directed that the sentences of imprisonment shall run concurrently and also ordered set off under Section 428 Cr.P.C. The appellant/accused, aggrieved by the conviction and sentence passed in the impugned judgment in S.C.No. 88 of 2006 by the trial Court, has filed this Criminal Appeal.

(2.) THE facts narrated in brief and necessary for the disposal of this Criminal Appeal, are as follows:

(3.) THE learned Counsel for the appellant has invited the attention of this Court to the testimonies of witnesses and exhibits marked on the side of the prosecution and would submit that in the light of the said infirmities, the trial Court ought to have awarded the benefit of doubt and acquitted the appellant/accused.