M. SAKTHIVEL Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the sole accused in S.C. No. 146 of 2012 on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Erode at Erode District. He stood charged for offences under Sections 302, 364 and 201 IPC. By judgment dated 17.08.2012, the trial Court convicted him under all the charges. For the offence under Section 302 IPC, the trial Court sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three years and for the offence under Section 364 IPC, sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three years and for the offence under Section 201 IPC, sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000/- in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for one year. The above sentences have been ordered to run concurrently. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant is before this Court with this appeal. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:

(2.) We have heard the learned senior counsel Mr. A. Navaneethakrishnan, appearing for the appellant and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and also perused the records, carefully.

(3.) This case is based on circumstantial evidence. At the outset, we should say that it is well settled that in a case based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution is bound to prove the circumstances projected by it beyond reasonable doubts and such proved circumstances should form a complete chain without any break, unerringly pointing to the guilt of the accused and there should not be any other hypothesis which is inconsistent with the guilt of the accused.