The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, emphasizing the importance of corroborative evidence and witness credibility.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, against the judgment and order, dated 15.07.2019 in S.C.No.22 of 2016 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Srivilliputhur, Virudhunagar District.)

J. Nisha Banu & N. Anand Venkatesh, JJ.

1. The sole accused, who was convicted for an offence under Section 302 IPC and was sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, to undergo 3 months Simple Imprisonment through judgment and order dated 15.07.2019, made in S.C.No.22/2016, passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Srivilliputhur, has preferred this criminal appeal.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the deceased Nagaraj had a family dispute with the appellant and there were repeated quarrels and hence the appellant had a motive to do away with the deceased. In furtherance of the same, on 14.04.2014, when the deceased returned back from Sivakasi and was getting down at Thulukankurichi bus stop and was walking near the tea shop of one Jeganathan at about 9.30 p.m., the appellant is said to have been waiting at that place, with M.O.6-knife and on seeing the deceased, he attacked the deceased in his chest, abdomen and thigh. As a result of the same, the deceased sustained grievous injuries and he died.

3. The son of the deceased, namely, P.W-1 gave a complaint, Ex.P1 at Vembakottai Police Station on 15.04.2014 at about 1.30 a.m. An FIR was registered in Crime No.138/2014 by P.W-20, who was the Sub Inspector of Police in the said police station for an offence under Section 302 IPC against the appellant. Pursuant to the same, the investigation was taken over by P.W-23 and he went to the scene of occurrence and prepared the spot mahazar and the sketch marked as Ex.P19 and Ex.P7 respectively. P.W-23 collected the bloodstained earth and ordinary earth under M.O.7 and M.O.8 and prepared Ex.P8 in the presence of witnesses. Thereafter, he proceeded to the Sivakasi Government Hospital and he conducted inquest on the body of the deceased and prepared an inquest report (Ex.P20) in the presence of witnesses.

4. The body of the deceased was sent for postmortem through P.W-21. In the course of investigation, the statement of witnesses was recorded under Section 161(3) Cr.P.C. The investigation officer got the information about the accused person and arrested him at about 12.15 p.m. The accused was examined in the presence of the Village Administrative Officer (P.W-8) and one Mohammed Rafiq and the accused is said to have voluntarily confessed and based on the confession, the weapon (M.O6) was recovered. The admissible portion of the confession was also marked as Ex.P4. The accused was brought to the police station at about 3.30 p.m., and at about 3.45 p.m., the bloodstained clothes of the accused was seized by giving him alternate clothes. It was seized under Ex.P6 and the clothes that were seized were marked as M.O4 and M.O5. The statement of the concerned witnesses was also recorded.

5. The accused person was thereafter produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate and he was remanded to judicial custody. Thereafter, on completion of recording the statement of the witnesses, the material objects that were seized were sent to the concerned Court under Form 91 with a requisition to send the same for expert opinion.

6. The investigation officer collected the postmortem report from P.W-22 and the statement of the doctor, who conducted the postmortem was also recorded. The investigation officer also recorded the statement of P.W-7, who is said to have given the first aid treatment to the deceased. The clothes that were found in the body of the deceased was also seized and it was forwarded under Form 91 to the concerned Court with the request to sent it for collecting the serology report. Those clothes were marked as M.O1 and M.O3.

7. The investigation was thereafter continued by P.W-24 and on completion of investigation, the fin