The main legal point established is that the prosecution must prove the alleged occurrence beyond reasonable doubt, and the benefit of doubt should be given to the accused in case of doubts raised by the evidence.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of Crl.P.C to set aside the judgement passed in S.C.No.3 of 2017 on the file of the 2nd Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Coimbatore, dated 26.11.2019.)

1. This appeal is filed against the judgment of the learned 2nd Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Coimbatore, dated 26.11.2019 in S.C.No.3 of 2017, in and by which, the appellant is convicted for the offence under Section 435 of Indian Penal Code and imposed 7 years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default to undergo 1 year rigorous imprisonment and on 3 counts for the offence under Section 307 of Indian Penal Code and imposed 10 years rigorous imprisonment for each count and fine of Rs.1,000/- for each count and in default for payment of fine to undergo 1 month rigorous imprisonment.

2. On 06.08.2014, when one Hemalatha, Sub-Inspector of Police was on duty at Thudiyalur Police Station, PW.1 one Ravi appeared before her and lodged a complaint to the effect that his family possesses 1 acre of land. In the said land, fencing by erecting cement poles and barbed iron wires was made by them and hut was constructed in the western corner, in which, one Sankaradas was living as a Watchman. While so, the accused, who was the owner of the adjacent land, developed jealousy and on 04.08.2014, at about 6.00 A.M., it was found that the said hut used by the Watchman was burning and therefore, when one Malathi, Manohar and Sankaradas attempted to go near and when they touched the fence, they got electric shock and at that time, the accused took away the wire which he used to make the electric connection and ran away. From this, they came to know that the accused had burnt the hut and also, so as to kill the persons who may come to douse the fire, he has given electricity connection in the fencing. On the said complaint, a case in Crime No.504 of 2014 was registered for the offences under Sections 435 and 307 IPC.

3. Initially, PW.11 Vetrivendan and thereafter PW.12 Saravanan, took up the case for investigation and laid the charge sheet, which was taken on file as PRC.No.31 of 2016 by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Coimbatore and after furnishing copies as per Section 207 of CPC, committed the case under Section 209 of CPC to the learned District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore, upon which, the case was taken on file as S.C.No.03 of 2017 and thereafter was made over to the Trial Court, namely, the 2nd Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Coimbatore. Thereafter, charges were framed for the said offences and upon being questioned, the appellant denied the charges and stood trial.

4. To bring home the charges, the prosecution examined one Ravi as PW.1, who is the first informant. The wife of said PW.1, namely one Kanchana, who is the owner of the property, was examined as PW.2. One Sasidharan, who was a resident near the scene of occurrence, was examined as PW.3 and he was an eye witness. One Malathi, who is also a resident nearby and who is also one of the injured witness who suffered the shock, was examined as PW.4. One Kalpana, who is the wife of the injured witness Sankaradas, was examined as PW.5 and she deposed that she came to the spot after the occurrence. One Satish Kumar, son of Sankaradas, was examined as PW.6, who is also examined as an eye witness to the incident. One Sankaradas, who is the Watchman residing in the subject property and who is an injured eye witness, was examined as PW.7. One Manoharan, who is also an eye witness and injured witness of electric shock, is examined as PW.8. One Kandhasamy, the Assistant Executive Engineer from the Electricity Board was examined as PW.9, for the purpose that there was electricity connection in the name of the accused in respect of his land near the place of occurrence. One Dr.Parameshwaran was examined as PW.10, who is a Doctor in a Private Hospital who examined the 3 injured witnesses and stated that he treated them by giving Neuro Vitamin Injection a