LAWS(MAD)-2008-3-155

RAVI ALIAS RAVICHANDRAN Vs. STATE

Decided On March 27, 2008
RAVI @ RAVICHANDRAN Appellant
V/S
STATE, REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant/sole accused in Sessions Case No.79 of 2005 on the file of Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Namakkal, was convicted for offences punishable under Sections 364 and 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo five years rigorous imprisonment and imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to undergo four months simple imprisonment respectively. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Aggrieved over the said conviction and sentence, the present appeal has been preferred before this Court.

(2.) THE allegation in the charge is that on 9.12.2003 at about 9.00 p.m., the deceased Mathaiyan was taken in a scooter near K.A.S. Spinning Mills and thereby, committed an offence of kinapping punishable under Section 364 I.P.C. and that during the course of same transaction, at about 10.00 p.m., the appellant caused injury on the backside of the head with a wheel spanner and thereafter, dragged him below a bridge and again assaulted on the head, and the deceased succumbed to those injuries and thereby, the accused is alleged to have committed an offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C.

(3.) THE accused was questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C. on completion of the evidence on the side of prosecution and he claimed innocence. Neither oral nor documentary materials were produced on the side of the defence. THE learned trial Judge, on perusal of the materials, oral and documentary and after hearing both sides, convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforementioned. Aggrieved against the said conviction and sentence, the present appeal has been preferred.6.1. THE learned counsel for the appellant submits that it is a case of circumstantial evidence and unless the chain of circumstances is complete and proved beyond reasonable doubts, the conviction in a case like this cannot be based. THE main circumstances which were relied on by the prosecution are the evidence of P.W.7, who is alleged to have seen the deceased alive in the company of the accused and the recovery of M.O.2, wheel spanner.