DHANAPAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants, who have been arrayed as A-1, A-2 and A-4 to A-9, have come forward with this appeal challenging their conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Thivannamalai, by the judgment dated 30.03.2007 made in S.C.No.143 of 2002.

(2.) THE appellants have been convicted and sentenced as follows: (i) A-1 has been convicted under Section 148 IPC and sentenced to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment and convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.7,000/- carrying with default sentence of one year rigorous imprisonment A-2 has been convicted under Section 147 IPC and sentenced to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment and convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.7,000/- carrying with default sentence of one year rigorous imprisonment and also convicted under Section 323 IPC and sentenced to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment A-4 has been convicted under Section 148 IPC and sentenced to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment and convicted under Sections 302 r/w 149 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.7,000/- carrying with default sentence of one year rigorous imprisonment A-5 has been convicted under Section 147 IPC and sentenced to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment and convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.7,000/- carrying with default sentence of one year rigorous imprisonment A-6, A-7, A-8 and A-9 have been convicted under Section 147 IPC and sentenced to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment and convicted under Sections 302 r/w 149 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.7,000/- carrying with default sentence of one year rigorous imprisonment. (ii) A-3 in this case died even prior to the trial and as such the charges against him abated.

(3.) WHEN the accused were questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in respect of the incriminating circumstances appearing against them, all the accused have come forward with the version of total denial and stated that they have been falsely implicated in this case. They have not chosen to examine any witness or mark any document on their side.