P. DEVADASS, J.

1. The sole accused in the Session Case in S.C.No.229 of 2010 on the file of the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Vellore is the appellant.

2. After trail, the learned Judge convicted and sentenced him as under:-

Conviction	Sentence
394 IPC	8 years RI and fine Rs.50,000/- i/d one year RI

3. The case of the prosecution in brief runs as under:

(i) On 06.11.2008 at about 11.30a.m., P.W.1 was grazing her cattle, near the burial ground in Eriputhur colony, in Narayanapuram Village in Vellore District. At that time the accused robbed her jewels (M.Os.1 to 7) at knife point. He had also injured her. It was witnessed to by P.W.2. P.W.1 cried. P.Ws.6 and 7 her husband and son came.

(ii) On the same day, at the Anaicut police station, P.W.1, gave Ex.P1, complaint to P.W.14, SI of Police. He registered this case (Ex.P14) F.I.R. P.W.15, Inspector, Anaicut Police Station took up his investigation. He visited the secene place. In the presence of P.Ws.8 and 9, he prepared Ex.P2 Observation Mahazar. Drew Ex.P15 Rough Sketch of the scene place. At the Government hospital, Vellore, he had examined P.W.1 and recorded her statement. He has also examined other witnesses and recorded their statement.

(iii) On 3.2.20210, at about 6 a.m., near A.R.R. Theatre, in Ambur when P.W.13, Inspector, Ambur Police Station came, on suspension, he had arrested the accused. He recorded his confessional statement/Ex.P12 in the presence of P.Ws.10 and 11. In pursuance of that the accused had produced M.Os.1 to 7 gold items of P.W.1. P.W.13 has handed over the accused along with the case properties to P.W.15.

(iv) P.W.15, obtained Ex.P16 Wound certificate for P.W.1 from the Doctor. Concluding his investigation, he has filed the Final report as against the accused for offences under Sections 392, 394, 397 and 506(ii) of I.P.C. before the committal Court.

4. The Committal Magistrate after complying the requirement under Section 207 Cr.P.C. committed the case to the Court of Sessions, Vellore. The case was made over to the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Vellore.

5. The Trial Court, upon hearing both sides and on consideration of the case-records framed charges under Section 392 r/w 397, 394, 506(ii) of IPC, as against the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charges.

6. Prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 15, marked Exs.P1 to P16 and exhibited M.Os.1 to 7.

7. When the accused was examined on the incriminating aspects appearing in the prosecution evidence under section 313 Cr.P.C., the accused denied the offences. He did not let in any defence evidence.

8. Appreciating the said evidence the Trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused as stated already.

9. Learned counsel for the appellant would contend that the accused was convicted de hors legal evidence. There was no fair trial. Throughout the Trial Court, the defence was not given opportunity to defend the case. There was no effective defence much less no defence before the Trial Court. Even his petition under Section 311 Cr.P.C. filed by the defence counsel was also dismissed by the Trial Court. In the circumstances, the sentence imposed by the Trial Court is not a legal sentence.

10. Learned counsel for the appellant also submitted that even if the evidence as such is taken the charges levelled against the accused are not established beyond all reasonable doubts.

11. On the other hand the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that evidence has been recorded in the presence of the accused. He was given opportunity. But, he did not avail it. The accused had adopted delaing tactics. In the circumstance, based on the evidence adduced, the Trial Court has convicted and sentenced him.

12. I have anxiously considered the rival submissions, perused the Trial Court's judgment and also perused the entire materials on record.

13. Totally 15 prosecution witnesses were examined