G.SIVAKUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the sole accused in S.C.No.238 of 2012. He is charged for the offence punishable under Sections 302 , 307 and 309 IPC. The trial Court, after trial, convicted the appellant for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 307 IPC, while acquitting him for the offence punishable under Section 309 IPC. Challenging the same, the present appeal is before us.

(2.) PROSECUTION CASE IN BRIEF:

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that there is delay in filing the complaint. Therefore, the case of the prosecution creates doubt. There was no independent witness examined to corroborate the evidence adduced by the prosecution witnesses. The trial Court ought not to have relied upon the evidence of P.Ws 2 and 3, being child witnesses. The recovery has not been proved in view of the evidence of P.W.4 that the knife (M.O.1) was kept inside the fence. There is a delay in receiving the material objects and other records by the Court. In any case, even the evidence of P.W.7 was to the effect that the appellant was not in a position to answer the questions as he was completely under the control of alcohol. This was also supported by the Accident Register Report under Ex.P.8. Therefore, either the appellant is entitled to acquittal or punishable under Section 302 Part (II) IPC. It is his further submission that there was no intention to murder the deceased, as the dispute, if any, was between the appellant and P.W.4.