M. THANGARAJ Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Originally, the accused were convicted for the offences under section 449, 302 and 394 IPC and were sentenced as follows:- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_414_LAWS(MAD)2_2018_1.html</FRM> In SC.NO.41/2014 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Fast Track Court, Erode, under judgment dated 20.10.2014. The Trial Court ordered the sentences awarded under section 449 and 302 IPC concurrently and the sentence awarded under section 394 IPC to run consecutively. Against which, the accused preferred two separate appeals in CA.Nos.39 and 341 of 2015. While allowing the appeals, this Court under Judgment dated 05.08.2016, noted down that material witnesses were examined and remanded SC.No.41/2014 to the file of the Trial Court and to transfer the same to the Court of Principal Sessions Judge, Erode, with a further direction to the learned Principal Sessions Judge to permit the prosecution to examine any witnesses afresh or to recall any witnesses already examined and to examine them further. The prosecution was also given liberty to let in any documentary evidence afresh to rectify the anomalies pointed out in the judgment. Similarly, accused were also given liberty to recall any witnesses already examined for the purpose of further cross-examination and to examine any defence witness. Further direction was also given to the effect that the Principal Sessions Judge shall dispose of the case in accordance with law by appreciating both, oral and documentary without getting influenced by any of the observations made in the said Judgment of this Court. After remand, three more witnesses were examined ; 1 more document was marked on the side of the prosecution and two documents were filed on the side of the defence. In nutshell, after remand, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 29 ; marked Exs.P.1 to 52 besides marking M.Os.1 to 11. The defence exhibited Exs.D1 and D2. Based on the evidence and materials, the Trial Court, acquitted the accused on the ground that the circumstances relied upon by the prosecution, has been established. Aggrieved over the said acquittal, the present appeal came to be filed by the defacto complainant-P.W.1 [brother of the deceased] and P.W.6 [son of the deceased].

(2.) Be that as it may, the facts leading to the filing of this appeal, briefly narrated and are necessary for the disposal of this criminal appeal, are as follows:-

(3.) Mr. N. Manoharan, learned counsel appearing for the appellants vehemently made the following submissions:-