NAGAIYAN Vs. STATE AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the sole accused in S.C.No.160/2008 on the file of the learned District and Sessions Judge, Nagapattinam and he stood charged and tried for the commission of offence under Section 302 IPC. The trial Court, vide impugned judgment dated 10.06.2011, convicted him for the commission of offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default to undergo 3 years simple imprisonment. The trial Court also granted set off under Section 428 CrPC. The sole accused, aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, has filed this appeal.

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

(3.) Mr.T.Shanmugam, learned counsel appearing for the appellant/accused would contend that PWs.1 and 2 are interested witnesses and so also PW3, neighbor, who would not have been present at the time of commission of offence. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/accused would further contend that the evidence of PW5 is also artificial and cannot be believed and the arrest and recovery were also stage managed and hence, the trial Court had committed grave error in convicting and sentencing the accused. Alternatively, it is the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/accused that even according to PW5, there was a quarrel between the appellant/accused and his wife/deceased at about 10.30 a.m. on 28.05.2006 and account of strained provocation, he would have committed the offence in heat of passion and prays for modification of the conviction and sentence.