MURUGA GOUNDAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE accused has been charged under Section 302, Penal Code and has been sentenced to death.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution is that the accused, along with two others (accused 2 and a), who have been acquitted, killed Unnamalai Ammal and removed the saradu that was worn by her. P. W. 3 is the sister of the accused, and V. W. 4 U the wife of the accused. They gave evidence before the Magistrate implicating the accused, but in the Sessions court they gave a different version altogether. The two witnesses were treated as hostile, and the learned Suasions Judge marked their depositions in the Magistrate's Court as substantive evidence under Section 288, Criminal P. 0. Exhisit p-4 is the deposition of P. W. 8 in the committing Magistrate's Court. She said that, four months ago, on a Monday, her younger brother, i. e. , the accused, Came to her and took from her a kaiaruval saying that he wanted it for cutting pandal post. On Wednesday he returned it at lamp, lighting time. On Thursday, he came again and asked her to give the kaiaruval. In that connection he told her that he and accused 2 and s joined together and killed the deceased, and that therefore he wanted to conceal the kaiaruval. Pursuant to his directions she con-cealed it. Later on, the police came along with the accused and asked for the kaiaruval. She took it from the place where she had concealed it and gave it to the police. P. W. 8 auo gave a statement before the Magistrate under 8. 164, Criminal P. 0. That statement was consistent with the evidence afforded by Ex. P-4 in all material particulars.

(3.) EXHISIT P-6 is the deposition of p. w. 4. P. w. 4 as already said, is the wife of the accused. She deposed that on the night of Wednesday the accused came and gave a gold saradu to her and asked her to keep it in the roof of the house, and she did so. When She asked him as to how be got the saraau, he asked her to keep quiet. On Sunday the accused came to her along with the police and he removed the saradu from the roof and gave it to the police. She also made a statement under Section 164, Criminal P. 0. , before the Magistrate, and the recitals in that statement are also consistent with the version given by her in the committing Court.