NAGARAJAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above Criminal Appeal is filed u/s 374 of Cr.P.C. 1973 praying to set aside the conviction and sentences imposed by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Nagapattinam, made in Sessions Case No.127 of 2009 dated 07-03-2012 against the appellant/accused.

(2.) Heard both sides and perused the records.

(3.) The learned counsel for the appellant/accused contended that the court below failed to assess the legal consequences of the material inconsistencies contradictions and omissions in the evidence of P.W.1, 2, 4 and 5 regarding the alleged dowry demand which factually affects the case of the prosecution. Except for bald statement of dowry demand made by the interested witnesses, there is no acceptable evidence to prove demand for dowry made by the accused. As the trial court disbelieved the evidence of P.W.1 to 3, in respect of the offence alleged under Section 302 IPC, it ought not to have accepted the evidence of the said witnesses in respect of dowry demand as the same cannot be separated from other part of evidence which according to the trial court is unbelievable. The trial court also failed to consider the undue delay of 12 hours in lodging the complaint with the Police. Likewise non production of Accident Register copy from G.H.,Thiruthuraipoondi and G.H., Vedaranyam was not considered by the trial court. Similarly, the trial court failed to consider that there was no complaint before the Police or Village Panchayatdars about dowry harassment committed by the accused. The evidence of P.W.3 is contrary to evidence of P.W.8/doctor. The evidence of P.W.1 is contrary to the contents of the FIR and also to the oral evidence of the Investigating Officer who deposed as P.W.10. As the deceased eloped with the accused and married him against the wishes of her family, the parents and grandparents of the victim who deposed as P.W.1 to 3 falsely implicated the accused in this case. As there was no eyewitness to the occurrence and no evidence to prove any motive for the occurrence, the conviction and sentence of trial court is unsustainable and the same is liable to be set aside. Thus, the accused/Appellant seeks to entertain the appeal.