MUTHUKUBERAN Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the first accused in S.C. No. 287 of 2005 on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kancheepuram District at Chengalput. There were two other accused arrayed as the accused 2 and 3, who are the mother and grandmother respectively of the first accused. The trial Court framed as many as four charges against the accused. The first charge was against all the three accused u/s. 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act; the second charge was against all the three accused u/s. 498(A) IPC; the third charge was against the first accused for offence u/s. 302 IPC; and the fourth charge was against the accused 2 and 3 for offence u/s. 302 r/w 109 IPC. By judgment dated 18.06.2012, the trial Court has acquitted the accused 2 and 3, but convicted the appellant for offence u/s. 302 IPC alone and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/ -, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. The trial Court acquitted the appellant from other charges. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the accused/appellant is before this Court with this appeal.

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

(3.) During the course of investigation, on 01.01.2003, at 10.00 a.m., at Arungunam Village, P.W. 18 arrested the first accused in the presence of P.W. 9 and another witness. On such arrest, the first accused gave a voluntary confession. But, no discovery of any fact was made out of the same. On the same day, at 11.00 a.m., at Arungunam Village, P.W. 18 arrested the second accused in the presence of P.W. 9 and another witness. On such arrest, she gave a voluntary confession, but no discovery of any fact was made out of the same. At 11.30 a.m., P.W. 18 arrested the third accused in the presence of the same witnesses. All the three accused were sent to the Court for judicial remand.