MURUGAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant herein, who was accused No.1 in S.C.No.43 of 2013 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Fast Track Court, Karur, was convicted for the offence under Sections 302 and 392 I.P.C. along with A2 to A4. Challenging the same, the present appeal has been filed.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that accused Nos.1 to 3 were working under the deceased, being a lady residing alone in her farm house, from 28.03.2012 onwards. On 29.03.2012 at about 10.00 p.m. they smothered her and took the jewels M.Os.1 to 5. On the next day, P.W.1, her son visited the deceased - farm house and found her dead. Ex.P.1 is the complaint lodged by him before P.W.22, Sub-Inspector of Police. The case was registered under Section 174 Cr.P.C. Thereafter, investigation was handed over to P.W.23, the investigation officer. P.W.23 sent the body for autopsy to Government Hospital, Karur. Thereafter, statements were recorded from the witnesses under Section 161(3) Cr.P.C. Observation Mahazar and Sketch was prepared on 31.03.201 The inquest was conducted under Ex.P.24 on the same day. M.Os.8 to 10 were recovered and forwarded to the Court. P.W.19 is the Doctor, who conducted postmortem. On 05.04.2012, the case was altered from Section 174 Cr.P.C. to 302 and 392 I.P.C. A1 to A3 were arrested by P.W.23 on 06.04.2012 in the presence of V.A.O. - P.W.11 and his Assistant - P.W.1 Confession Statements have been recorded under Ex.P.28 from A1 in the presence of P.W.11 and P.W.1 M.O.3 and M.O.4 said to have been pledged through A4 with the help of P.W.14 were recovered through P.W.15, being the Manager of a Finance Company. A1 gave a confession statement under Ex.P.28, pursuant to which M.O.11 was recovered. A2 also gave a confession statement under Ex.P.29, pursuant to which M.O.1 was recovered. Under Ex.P.30, confession statement was recorded from A3 and M.Os.2 and 13 were recovered. Similarly M.O.5 was recovered from A.4. Finally, on completing the investigation, P.W.24 laid the charge sheet against the accused under Section 302 and 392 I.P.C.

(3.) Based on the above materials, the Trial Court framed charges as mentioned above. During the trial, on the side of the prosecution, as many as 24 witnesses were examined and 33 documents were exhibited, besides 13 Material Objects. When the above incriminating materials were put to the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C, they denied the same as false.