JUDGMENT :

Vinod Chandran, J.

An aged agriculturist living alone, who had a predilection for gold ornaments, which he casually flaunted on his body, was murdered and robbed of those ornaments, by his own nephew. A crime for gain, is the case of the prosecution, while the defence is of mistaken identity. To the detriment of the accused, his accomplice turned approver.

2. Before Court, 29 witnesses were paraded, who marked Exts.P1 to P87 documents and 22 MOs were also marked as MO1 to MO20(a). The trial Court found the accused guilty under Ss.450, 394 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code. On sentence, considering the fact that the accused was an earlier convict under S.302, imprisonment for life was imposed with the condition that the accused shall not be released for a period of 20 years, relying on Swamy Shraddananda v. State of Karnataka [AIR 2008 SC 3040 = (2008) 13 SCC 767]. A sentence of fine of Rupees One lakh was also imposed under S.302 with default R.I. for one year. Under Ss.450 and 394, a further sentence each of R.I. for ten years and fine of Rupees Fifty thousand each were imposed again with default sentence.

3. Sri. P. Vijayabhanu, the learned Senior Counsel, appeared for the