M. CHOCKALINGAM, J.

Challenge, is made to the judgment of the Principal Sessions Judge Dharmapuri, made in S.C. No. 109 of 2009 dated 9.4.2010 whereby, the appellant/accused stood charged and tried under Section 302 I.P.C.. and on trial, he was found guilty of the above said charge and he was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and he was imposed with a fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years.

2 The short facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal can be stated thus:

(a) P.W.1 is the father of P.W.2. The appellant/accused is the husband of P.W.2. The marriage between P.W.2 and appellant/accused was solemnized five years before, and a male child was born to them. During the matrimonial life often quarrel arose between them and P.W.1 used to interfere and pacify them.

(b) On the date of occurrence, viz., 13.1.2005 at about 11.00 a.m., P.W.2 was in the house. Her husband/appellant/accused was also in the house. P.W.2 went outside the house to wash the clothes leaving her child in the cradle. Suddenly, she heard a distressing, cry of the child. Immediately, she went inside the house and found the appellant/accused strangulating the child with M.O.2-rope. On seeing the said incident, she cried “Don‘t Kill, Don‘t Kill the child ” . Immediately, the appellant/accused ran away from the place of occurrence. On receipt of information, P.W.1, father of P.W.2, who was residing at Salem rushed to the house of P.W.2. P.W.2 came to know about the incident. Then, he proceeded to the respondent Police Station and gave Exhibit P-1-complaint. On the strength of the same, a case came to be registered by P.W.11 in Cr. No. 14 of 2005 under Section 302 IPC. The copy of the First Information Report Exhibit P-9, was despatched to the Court.

(c) P.W.12, this Circle Inspector, on receipt of the copy of the F.I.R., took up the investigation, proceeded to the place of occurrence, made an inspection in the presence of the witnesses and prepared Exhibit P-2, the observation mahazar and Exhibit P-10, the rough sketch. He has taken photos and the photos and negatives were marked as M.Os.3 and 4. The inquest on the dead body of the deceased was conducted by the Investigating Officer in the presence of witnesses and he prepared Exhibit P-11, the inquest report. Following the same, the dead body of the deceased was sent for the purpose of autopsy along with a requisition letter Exhibit P-6. Then, he seized the M.O.1 saree in the presence of witnesses.

(d) P.W.5, the Doctor attached to the Harur Government Hospital has conducted autopsy on the dead body of the deceased and has issued Exhibit P-7, the post-mortem certificate, wherein, the Doctor has opined that the child died due to Asphyzia due to strangulation.

(e) Pending investigation, the appellant/accused was arrested on 19.1.2005 at 7.30 a.m. and he volunteered to give a confessional statement, which was recorded in the presence of the witnesses. The admissible portion of the confession is marked as Exhibit P-4. Pursuant to the confessional statement, the appellant/accused produced the M.O.2-rope from the hidden place viz., bush, which was recovered in the presence of witnesses under a cover of mahazar. Ths viscera and hyoid bone were sent for Chemical Analysis and pursuant to which, Exhibit P-15, the Bone Case report and Exhibit P-16, the Viscera report, were received. The Investigating Officer examined all the witnesses and recorded their statements. On completion of the investigation, he filed the final report in Cr. No. 14 of 2005 for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C.

(f) The case was committed to the Court of Sessions and necessary charges were framed. In order to substantiate the charges, the prosecution has marched 13 witnesses as P.Ws.1 to 13 and also relied on 16 exhibits as Exhibits P-1 to P-16 and relied on four material objects as M.Os.1 to 4. On completion of the evidence on the side of the prosecution, the appellant/accused