MOLISELVAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants are the accused 1 and 2 in Sessions Case No.79 of 2016, on the file of the III Additional District and Sessions Court, Gobichettipalayam. They stood charged for offence under Sections 302 read with Sec. 120-B and Sec. 302 IPC. By judgement dated 8.11.2016, the trial Court convicted them only under Sec. 302 Penal Code and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1000.00 each, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for four weeks. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellants are before this Court with this appeal.

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

(3.) Based on the above materials, the trail Court framed charges as detailed in the first paragraph of this judgement. The accused denied the same. In order to prove the case, on the side of the prosecution, as many as 17 witnesses have been examined, 31 documents and 23 material objects were marked. Out of the said witnesses, P.W.1, the wife of the deceased, P.W.2, the daughter-in-law of the deceased, P.W.3, a neighbour have all stated that they found the dead body of the deceased at 8.00 a.m. on 09.01.2016, in the cremation ground. P.W.4 has stated that on 8.1.2016, at around 12.30 p.m., he found these accused somewhere near the cremation ground. P.W.5 has stated that at around 12.00 mid night, on 8.1.2016, he found these two accused near the cremation ground. P.W.6, the daughter of the deceased, has stated that she found the dead body of the deceased in the graveyard on 9.1.2016. P.W.7 has spoken about the preparation of observation mahazar and a rough sketch and the recovery of material objects. P.W.8, the Doctor, has spoken about the post-mortem conducted and the final opinion regarding the cause of death. P.W.9, the Village Administrative Officer, has spoken about the extra judicial confession said to have been made by the first accused. He has further stated about the arrest of both the accused, the confession made by them and the recoveries of wooden logs, the lungies and shirts, from out of their disclosure statements. P.W.11, a Constable, has stated that he handed over the dead body to the Doctor for post-mortem, as directed by P.W.16. P.W.13, a scientists from the Regional Forensic and Science Laboratory, has stated that he examined the material objects sent to him and on examining them, he found human blood stains on all the material objects, except item No.7. P.W.15 has stated that he took photographs of the dead body, as directed by P.W.16. P.Ws.16 and 17 have spoken about the investigation done and the final report filed.