AYYANAR Vs. STATE OF TAMILNADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CRIMINAL appeal preferred under Sec.374(2) of the Code of CRIMINAL Procedure against the judgment of the Principal Sessions Judge, Salem, made in S.C.No,317 of 2005 dated 16.12.2005.) This appeal challenges a judgment of the Principal Sessions Division, Salem, made in S.C.No,317 of 2005 whereby the sole accused/appellant stood charged, tried and found guilty under Sections 302 and 201 of IPC and awarded life imprisonment along with a fine of Rs.1000/- and default sentence under Sec.302 IPC and 3 years Rigorous Imprisonment with a fine of Rs.1000/- and default sentence under Sec.201 IPC.

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

(3.) THE learned Counsel would further add that the prosecution had no direct evidence to offer that the main circumstance relied on by the prosecution was the evidence of P.Ws.6 and 7 that according to them, they found the accused along with the gunny bag carrying in a TVS 50 at about 11.00 P.M. on the date of occurrence i.e., 20.2.2004 and they intercepted and questioned him but he did not reply and went away that the evidence of P.Ws.6 and 7 would clearly indicate that there could not have been any occasion for them to be present at the place and time as spoken to by them that apart from that, they were also chance witnesses that the discrepancies in their evidence would clearly indicate that they could not have been present at all that the statements of those witnesses were recorded in order to march a circumstance to strengthen the prosecution story that P.W.8 would claim that the TVS 50 was actually taken from him at about 8.00 P.M. On 20.2.2004, by the accused telling that he wanted to go to Omalur and would bring it back, and it was actually given by him that a perusal of the cross-examination would indicate that the relationship between P.W.8 and the accused was strained that under the circumstances, he could not have lent TVS 50 to the accused, and hence his evidence should not have been believed by the trial Court.