MUNIRAJ Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants, who have been arrayed as A-1 and A-2 in this case, have come forward with this appeal challenging the conviction and sentence imposed on them by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Dharmapuri, by the judgment dated 28.08.2006 made in S.C.No.137 of 2005, convicting A-1 under Section 302 IPC and sentencing him to undergo life imprisonment and also imposing a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default, to undergo three months rigorous imprisonment convicting him under Section 449 IPC and sentencing him to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment and imposing a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo three months simple imprisonment convicting A-2 under Section 201 IPC and sentencing him to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment and imposing a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo three months simple imprisonment and also convicting him under Section 506 (ii) IPC and sentencing him to undergo one year imprisonment and imposing a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to undergo three months simple imprisonment. THE sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) THERE are six accused in this case and the learned trial Judge acquitted A-3 to A-6 disbelieving the prosecution case and convicted the appellants, A-1 and A-2, and sentenced them as stated above.

(3.) WHEN the accused were questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in respect of the incriminating circumstances appearing against them through the evidence adduced by the prosecution, they have come forward with the version of total denial and examined D.W.1. It is stated by D.W.1 that on the date of occurrence A-1 came to him and asked him to inform about the death of the deceased to the house of in-laws of the deceased. D.W.1 went along with one Mani to the house of in-laws of the deceased and as they were not available in the house enquired the persons available there and asked them to convey the message.