VIJAI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment shall govern these two criminal appeals, C.A.No.192/2006 at the instance of A-2 and C.A.No,903/2006 at the instance of A-1, who along with A-3 stood charged, tried and found guilty by the Additional Sessions Division, Fast Track Court No.I, Erode, in S.C.No.154/2005 and on being found guilty, awarded punishment as follows: TABLE

(2.) NECESSARY facts for the disposal of these appeals can be stated as follows:

(3.) ADDED further the learned Counsel that according to P.W.2, the accused went over to get brandy, chicken and other eatables, and the accused persons and P.W.2 all shared along with the watchman, and thus he became fainted but when the postmortem was conducted by P.W.9, the Doctor, he has given a categorical opinion and has given testimony at the time of the cross-examination that there was nothing to indicate that he has either consumed brandy or he had taken chicken, and thus it would be quite evident that the evidence of P.W.2 cannot be believed.