T K SATHISH KUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE sole accused, T.K. Sathish Kumar, has come forward with this Appeal challenging the judgement dated 25.1.2006, passed by the leaned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Chennai, made in S.C.No:439 of 2005, convicting him for the offence under Section 302 IPC and sentencing him to life imprisonment and also imposing a fine of Rs.1,000/=, in default, to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) THE prosecution version as unfolded during the course of trial, in a nutshell, are as follows:-

(3.) MR. T.R. Sivaram, learned counsel appearing for the appellant/accused contended that the prosecution has not proved its case by adducing clear and cogent evidence. It is submitted that the prosecution has examined P.W.3 to speak about the actual occurrence. But, P.W.3 has turned hostile and as such the entire prosecution case rests on circumstantial evidence. It is contended by the learned counsel that the prosecution has not put forward any clear and cogent circumstances to connect the accused with the alleged crime and there are several missing links in the circumstances put forward by the prosecution. The learned counsel further submits that the alleged extra judicial confession said to have been made by the accused to P.W.1 is unbelievable as the accused was not close to P.W.1 to repose confidence on him to give such an extra judicial confession. It is contended that except the extra judicial confession said to have been given to P.W.1, there is no other material to connect the accused with the alleged offence.