JAYASANKAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants are the accused 1 & 2 in S.C.No.213 of 2004 on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions cum Fast Track Court No.II, Tuticorin. Altogether, including the appellants, there were three accused. These two appellants each stood charged for the alleged offences under Sections 450, 376(2)(g) and 506(ii) of IPC and the third accused stood charged for the offences under Sections 506(ii) and 376(2)(g) r/w 109 of IPC.

(2.) The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows;

(3.) Based on the above materials, the trial Court framed appropriate charges as detailed herein above. In order to prove the case, the prosecution examined as many as 13 witnesses and marked 24 documents (Exs.P1 to P24) and 9 material objects (MOs.1 to 9). PW1 has spoken to about the occurrence. PWs.2 & 3, who are the parents of PW1, have also spoken to about the occurrence. PWs.4 & 5 have turned hostile and they have not supported the case of the prosecution in any manner. PW6 is the Village Administrative Officer and he spoken to about the seizure of material objects. PW9 - another villager has also turned hostile. PW10 has spoken to about the fact that PW1 and her family members were residing in a hut in the salt pan. PW8 - Dr.Sundarraj has spoken to about the medical examination conducted on A1 & A2. PW12 has spoken to about the medical examination conducted on PW1. PW11 has spoken to about the registration of the case and PW13 has spoken to about the investigation. When the accused were questioned under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. in respect of the above incriminating materials, they denied the same as false. No oral and documentary evidence was let in by the accused. Having considered all the above, the trial Court convicted the accused and punished them as I detailed in the first paragraph of this judgment. Hence, this appeal before this Court.