JUDGMENT :

SUNDER MOHAN, J.

Prayer : Criminal Appeal filed under Sections 374(2) of Criminal Procedure Code to call for the records of the Judgment passed in S.C.No.407 of 2018 dated 02.04.2019 on the file of the IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli and set aside the same and acquit the appellant/accused.

The sole accused has filed the above appeal challenging the Judgment of Conviction and Sentence imposed on him for the offence under Sections 302, 364 and 201 IPC by the learned IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli in S.C.No.407 of 2018 dated 02.04.2019.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 27.08.2016 at about 11.45 p.m, the appellant/accused with an intention to cause the death of his friend Ramesh called him to help him in committing murder of another person and took him in his bike bearing Reg.No.TN-76-D-6495 by concealing Knife and Aruval in his dress to cause his death. The appellant/accused parked the vehicle about 100 metres away from the town and when the people of the village were witnessing temple festival, the appellant took the deceased to a nearby farm belonging P.W.4 and attacked the deceased by using the Knife and Aruval. After causing death, the appellant cut the private part of the deceased and stuffed it in his mouth. Thereafter, he set fire to the body of the deceased by pouring petrol. The motive, according to the prosecution, is that on 27.08.2016, at about 10.00 a.m, the deceased had misbehaved with the daughter of the appellant, aged about 1-1/2 years, by touching her private part. That was witnessed by the appellant and hence, he decided to cause death of the deceased.

3. The appellant was charged and convicted for the offences under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment; for the offence under Section 364 IPC, he was sentenced to 10 years R.I; and for the offence under Section 201 IPC, he was sentenced to 3 years R.I.

4. Before the Trial Court, the prosecution examined 20 witnesses and marked Ex.P.1 to P.28 and M.O.Nos.1 to 11. The defence marked Exs.D.1 to D.3. The appellant did not examine any witness on his side.

5. The prosecution sought to prove the case as stated earlier by examining 20 witnesses and marking Exs.P.1. P.20. P.W.1 is the Village Administrative Officer, who saw the body of the deceased on information from one Ayyamperumal (P.W.4) in whose land, the body of the deceased was found on 29.08.2016 at about 05.00 a.m. The Village Administrative Officer (P.W.1) lodged the complaint (Ex.P.1). P.W.2 is the Special Tashildar, who handed over the details of voters list, in which, the name of the deceased was found. P.W.3 was witness to the arrest and recovery of M.O.No.1-Aruval, M.O.No.2-Knife and M.O.No.3-Lungee and M.O.No.4- Shirt, which were recovered pursuant to the confession of the accused. P.W.4 is the land owner in whose farm, the deceased was found dead. P.W. 5 is the witness to the Observation Mahazer and to the Rough Sketch. P.W. 6 is a native of the deceased, who is said to have seen the deceased at the Narayanasamy Temple Festival on 27.08.2016 afternoon. P.W.7 is the mother of the deceased, who said to have seen the deceased along with the appellant at the temple festival on the night of 27.08.2016 and thereafter, saw him taking the deceased alone. P.W.8 is the brother of the deceased, who saw the deceased near the appellant at the temple festival on 27.08.2016 at 11.00 p.m. P.W.9 is the Scientific Expert, who had given Ex.P.9-Report. P.W.10 is the Assistant Director working in the Forensic Science Department, Ramanathapuram, who had examined the blood samples found in M.O.No.3-Lungee and M.O.No.4-shirt and gave his report Exs.P.13 to 15. P.W.11 who works in Sub-Court, Valliyoor, speaks about the receipt of the Forensic Science Report. P.W.12 is the Village Administrative Officer, before whom, the appellant is said to have appeared on 19.10.2016 at about 09.00 a.m and given a Extra Judicial Confession. P.W.12 prepared special report,