SARAVANAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE is made to the judgment of the Additional District and Sessions Division, Tirupattur, Vellore District made in S. C. No. 180 of 2008 whereby the appellants stood charged, tried and on trial, A1 was found guilty under section 302 IPC and awarded life imprisonment and A2 was found guilty under section 498 (A) IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and awarded two years rigorous imprisonment for each charge. The sentences are ordered to run concurrently. Hence, this appeal at the instance of the appellants.

(2.) THE short facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal can be stated as follows:

(3.) ADVANCING the arguments on behalf of the appellants, the learned senior counsel, Mr. V. Gopinath would submit, in the instant case, the prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case. There is no direct evidence available and the prosecution rested its case upon circumstantial evidence. The main piece of evidence which was relied on by the prosecution was the extra judicial confession alleged to have been made by A1 to P. W. 2, Village Administrative Officer. The occurrence has taken place at about 6. 30 a. m on 25. 3. 2008. It is admitted by P. W. 2 that A1 was not already known to him or a friend of him. Therefore, there was no reason for A1 to appear before P. W. 2/ V. A. O. , that too, after three days from the date of occurrence. From the evidence of P. W. 1, P. W. 7 and the mahazar witness/p. W. 3, it is seen that A1 was very well available in the police station for nearly about 3 days. Thus, it would be quite clear that the accused was actually in the custody of the police. The said document could not have come into existence as putforth by the prosecution. The prosecution has taken the service of P. W. 2 to strengthen their case.