Credibility of eyewitness accounts and refutation of the appellant's claim of murder for gain were central to the court's decision.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, against the judgment and order, dated 20.08.2019 in S.C.No.789 of 2017 passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli.)

R. Hemalatha, J.

1. The appellant has filed the present appeal against the judgment and order dated 20.08.2019 passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge Tirunelveli, in S.C.No.789 of 2017, wherein the appellant was convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 506(ii) IPC, and sentenced as under:

The trial court further directed that the sentences shall run concurrently.

2. The prosecution theory runs as follows:

i. The appellant, Marimuthu was already married to one Saratha Rani and has two children through her. He was residing with his family at Pazhayapettai, Sartharpuram, East Street, Tirunelveli. During the period when he was employed in Tiruppur, he met the victim (the deceased) Kavitha and was living with her. The appellant has a child by name, Subash Gopi, aged about 4 years through the said Kavitha (deceased). It is also contended that the appellant was employed abroad for a brief period and at that time, Kavitha and her son Subash Gopi were residing with the parents of Kavitha, Veeraammal [P.W-10] and Chellamuthu [P.W-23] at Rajavaramputhur, Kanakkampatti, Palani, Dindigul District. When the appellant returned to India, he chose to live with his wife Saratha Rani at Tirunelveli. The victim was agitated due to this decision of the appellant and went to his house on 12.10.2016 insisting that the appellant should take care of her and not be deserted. The appellant reportedly promised to take Kavitha to his mother's house in the same town. When both of them started walking towards his mother's house, an altercation erupted between the two and infuriated over the same, the appellant attacked the victim in front of Poomani teacher's house at about 1.00 a.m., with a bill hook [M.O-1] which he had hidden on his back (inside his T-shirt). The attack was so intense causing multiple cut injuries on both sides of her neck and shoulders that caused her instantaneous death. He then fled the scene of crime immediately. However, the incident was witnessed by some labourers, viz., Krishnakumar [P.W-15], Mariappan [P.W-16] and Rajkumar [P.W-21], working in Poomani teacher's house. Murugan [P.W-2], another witness was bringing the building materials to the house of Poomani teacher at that time. The occurrence was also witnessed by one of the neighbours of Poomani teacher, Gurusamy [P.W-3]. Infact, after hearing the loud arguments between the appellant and his paramour Kavitha, the eyewitnesses thought it to be a family dispute and did not want to intervene, but suddenly, it turned out to be a fatal attack by the appellant on his paramour Kavitha. According to the prosecution, Murugan [P.W-2] had called Thiru.Sivasubramanian [P.W-1], Village Assistant and informed him about the incident and based on his telephonic message, PW-1 lodged a complaint Ex.P-1 to the police on the same day at about 2.30 a.m.

ii. Thiru.Murugaiah [P.W-22], the Sub Inspector of Police, Tirunelvei Pettai Police Station received Ex.P-1 from P.W-1 and registered an FIR [Ex.P-13] in Crime No.626 of 2016 against the appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 302 and 506(ii) IPC. He sent the Express FIR to the jurisdictional Magistrate through Brammanayagam [P.W-18], Head Constable of Police attached to Tirunelveli Pettai Police Station. The Magistrate received the FIR at 6.00 a.m., on 12.10.2016.