ESWARAN ALIAS SHANMUGAVEL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the lower court u/s. 302 I. P. C against the accused in S. C. No. 128/2008 dated 15. 04. 2009.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution in brief would be as follows:-The deceased Mani was having illicit connection with the witness Rajammal and the wife and children of the deceased Mani were ekking out their livelihood in New Delhi by doing coolie work. On 09. 02. 2008 at about 07. 30 p. m the deceased Mani and Rajammal had gone to the liquor shop at Kalingarayanpalayam for consuming liquor and since there was no money with the deceased Mani he approached the accused and according to the wish of the accused the witness Rajammal had agreed to have illicit intercourse with the said accused and for that they had gone near Chithode Periyar Nagar cremation ground and at about 10. 00 p. m the deceased Mani demanded money from the accused for having such sexual relationship with Rajammal and for that the accused had not paid immediately and the deceased Mani had taken the stone and attacked on the left side chest of the accused. Infuriated with the said action of the deceased Mani, the accused had pushed the deceased Mani down to the ground and had taken a big stone and hit against his head and face and thus caused injuries to him and the said Mani died due to injuries and the Rajammal was shouting on scene of occurrence and the accused with a view to kill the said Rajammal, attacked her with the stone and had caused grievous injuries. Thereafter, the accused escaped from the scene of occurrence. A complaint was given by the P. W. 1 and upon the complaint the respondent police registered a case in Cr. No. 57/2008 and investigated the case and filed charge sheet against the accused before the Jurisdictional Magistrate and after going through the papers, procedurally it was committed to the court of sessions and the Principal Sessions Judge, Erode has taken the case on file of S. C. No. 128/2008 and made over the said case to Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court No. 1) for disposal.

(3.) PROSECUTION had examined 19 witnesses and 25 documents and produced 29 material objects in order to substantiate the case of the prosecution.