LAWS(MAD)-2016-8-190

PALANISAMY Vs. THE STATE, REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AAPPAKUDAL POLICE STATION, BHAVANI, ERODE DISTRICT. (CRIME NO.52 OF 2013)

Decided On August 05, 2016
PALANISAMY Appellant
V/S
The State, rep. by The Inspector of Police, Aappakudal Police Station, Bhavani, Erode District. (Crime No.52 of 2013) Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants are the accused 2 and 1 in S.C.No.41 of 2014 on the file of Fast Track Mahila Sessions Court, Erode. They stood charged for the offences under Sections 394, 302 and 449 IPC. By judgment, dated 20.10.2014, the trial Court convicted them under all the charges and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and pay fine of Rs. 10,000.00 each; in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years for the offence under Sec. 449 IPC; to undergo imprisonment for life and pay fine of Rs. 10,000.00 each; in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years for the offence under Sec. 394 IPC; and to undergo imprisonment for life and pay file of Rs. 25,000.00 each; in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years for the offence under Sec. 302 IPC. The trial Court directed that the sentences imposed for the offences under Sections 449 and 302 Penal Code shall run concurrently and the sentence imposed for the offence under Sec. 394 Penal Code shall run consecutively. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellants are before this Court with these appeals.

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

(3.) Based on the above materials, the trial Court framed charges as detailed in the first paragraph of this judgment and the accused denied the same. In order to prove the case, on the side of the prosecution, as many as 26 witnesses were examined, 51 documents and 11 material objects were marked. When the above incriminating materials were put to the accused, they denied the same as false. Having considered all the above, the trial Court convicted the accused as detailed in the first paragraph of this judgment. That is how, they are before this Court with these appeals. (The details of the evidences spoken by all the witnesses are not elaborately dealt with, in view of the nature of the direction that we are going to give in this judgment.)