ARUNKUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN these multiple Appeals, each of the convicted accused (there are four accused in all) are challenging their conviction given by the learned trial Judge holding each one of them guilty under Sections 449, 302 read with 34 and 392, I.P.C. For the offence of murder committed by sharing the common intention, each one stands sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life together with a fine of Rs.1,000/- carrying a default sentence. For their conviction under Section 449 and 392, I.P.C. each one stands sentenced to undergo five years rigorous imprisonment for each offence together with a fine of Rs.500/- carrying a default sentence. The sentence stand directed to run concurrently. Heard Mr.S.Shanmugavelayutham learned Senior Counsel appearing for A-2, Mr.J. Chandren, learned counsel appearing for A-4, Mr. S. Sivakumar learned counsel appearing for A-3; Mr. M.N. Balakrishnan, learned counsel appearing for A-1 an Mr. N.R. Elangu, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State.

(2.) THE prosecution case is that by trespassing into the house of an old lady by name Saroja at about 11.00 a.m. on 16.6.2003, the accused murdered her and then decamped with the jewellery belonging to her and found in her house valued at Rs. 35,000/- or so. THE prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 16 to prove their case. Exs. P. 1 to P.28 and M.Os. 1 to 29 also came to be marked by their side. THE defence did not let in either oral or documentary evidence.

(3.) P.W.16 is the investigating officer in this case At 3.00 p.m. on 16.6.2003, Sornambigai - sister of P.W.1 appeared before him and gave a written Complaint Ex.P.17 is the said Compliant. He registered Ex.P. 17 Police Station Crime No. 384 of 2003 under Sections 454, 302 and 380 I.P.C. Ex.P.18 is the printed First Information Report. He served a copy of Ex.P.18 to Sornambigai under her acknowledgment. He sent the express records to the Court as well as to the higher records to the Court as well as to the higher officials P.W. 16 reached the crime scene at 4.15 p.m. and prepared Ex.P.15 the Observation Mahazar and Ex,.P. 19 the Rough Sketch in the presence of witnesses. From the dead body he removed M.O.1 the green colour cloth and M.O.2 the severed Mangal Sutra thread under Ex.P.2 attested by witnesses. The he caused the crime scene and the dead body to be photographed. M.O.28 series are the photographs and the negatives. Then P.W.16 requisitioned the services of the Finger Print Expert who is P.W.12 in this case. Dogs squad was also summoned. In the mean time, P.W.16 conducted inquest over the dead body in the presence Ex.P.20 the Inquest Report, During inquest he examined P.W.1 Sornambigai and other by recording their statements P.W.16 lifted the finger prints of Sornambigai the deceased, P.W.1 and others before sending the dead body for post-mortem P.W.16 then sent the dead body to the hospital for post-mortem.