GOVINDARAJ Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant was tried in Sessions Case No.227 of 2005 on the file of I Additional Sessions Judge, Krishnagiri, for offences under Sections 427, 341, 342, 302 read with 34 and 326 read with 34 IPC. THE learned trial Judge by judgment dated 25.6.2007, convicted and sentenced him as given below: TABLE Aggrieved by the aforesaid conviction and sentence, the present appeal has been preferred before this Court.

(2.) THE appellant was alleged to have committed the offence along with two other accused, namely, Thangavel and Vairan and since, pending trial, the other two accused died, the trial of the case proceeded against the present appellant. THE deceased accused Thangavel and the deceased accused Vairan will be referred to as DA-1 and DA-2 respectively for the sake of convenience.

(3.) PER contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that though there is a contradiction in the name of the appellant, the name of the father of the appellant has been correctly mentioned; that it is only after receiving information through the village menial, P.W.7 reached the scene of occurrence and since the occurrence took place in the early morning, P.W.7 reached the scene of occurrence at 6.30 a.m. and thereafter, he took P.W.1, who was also injured, along with him to the police station and lodged the complaint, Ex.P.1 and hence, there is no delay in recording the first information report. He further submits that the appellant and other accused are known to the witnesses, since they are living in the same village and the availability of street light and the light burning in the verandah had been spoken to by the witnesses and hence, there is no difficulty in identifying the accused. The motive put forth by the prosecution is also strong enough to prove the case against the accused and thus, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the prosecution has well established its case beyond all reasonable doubts.