SAKTHIVEL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is filed by A-3, namely Sakthivel, Son of Manickam, challenging the impugned judgment dated 06.02.2017, passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dharmapuri, Dharmapuri District. There are totally three accused and they stood tried and convicted by the trial Court as follows: Charged and tried under Sec. Sec. Accused Conviction and Sentence passed by the Trial Court Acquitted by the Trial Court 1st Charge - Sec. 120-B r/w.302 I.P.C. Al to A3 A1 and A2 were convicted for the offence under Sec. 120-B r/w. 302 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and also to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000.00 in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 months. A3 was acquitted for the offence under Sec. 120-B r/w.302 I.P.C.

(2.) nd Charge - Sec. 302 I.P.C. A1 and A3 A1 and A3 were convicted for the offence under Sec. 302 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and also to pay fine of Rs.1,000.00 in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 months -------

(3.) rd Charge - A2 -------- A2 was acquitted for the offence under Sec. 302 r/w. 109 I.P.C. The Trial Court, in respect of the accused A-1 and A-2 had ordered the sentence of imprisonment for the proved charges to run concurrently and also granted set-off under section 428 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 [Cr.P.C]. It is brought to the knowledge of this Court that A-1 and A-2 so far not preferred any appeal and the State did not prefer any appeal against acquittal of the appellant/A-3 in respect of Charge No. 1 for the offence under Sec. 120-B r/w.302 I.P.C. 2. Facts leading to the filing of this appeal by the appellant/A-3, briefly narrated, are as follows: