JUDGMENT :

P. VELMURUGAN, J.

Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Sections 372 of Criminal Procedure Code, praying to set aside the Judgment in Spl.Case No. 5 of 2018 passed by the learned Special Judge (Principal Sessions Judge) Villupuram Sessions Division, Villupuram dated 25.10.2019 and convict the respondents 2 & 3 respondents/accused by rendering exemplary punishment and also award victim compensation under Section 357(3) & 357(A) of Cr.P.C.

1. This Criminal Appeal has been filed seeking to set aside the Judgment in Spl.Case No. 5 of 2018 passed by the learned Special Judge (Principal Sessions Judge) Villupuram Sessions Division, Villupuram dated 25.10.2019 and convict the accused/respondents 2 & 3 herein by rendering exemplary punishment and also award victim compensation under Section 357(3) & 357(A) of Cr.P.C.

2. The respondent police registered the case in Crime No. 733 of 2017 initially against the 2nd respondent for offence punishable under Sections 379 and 304 IPC and during the course of investigation, the son of the 2nd respondent/3rd respondent herein was also arrested and the offences were altered into Section 304 IPC read with Section 135 (1) (a) of Electricity Act 2003 and after completing the investigation, the respondent police laid charge sheet before the Judicial Magistrate No. II, Tindivanam. The learned Magistrate taken the charge sheet on file in P.R.C.No. 18 of 2018 and after completing the formalities under Section 207 Cr.P.C., committed the case to the Special Judge (Principal Sessions Judge) Villupuram Sessions Division, Villupuram since the offences are exclusively triable by the Court of Session. The learned Principal Sessions Judge taken up the case on file in Spl.Case.No. 5 of 2018 and after completing the formalities, framed the charges against the the accused/respondents 2 and 3 for offence under Section 135 (1) (a) of Indian Electricity Act and Section 304 (ii) IPC.

3. After framing the charges, in order to prove the case of the prosecution during trial, totally 10 witnesses were examined as PW-1 to PW-10 and 17 documents were marked as Exs.P.1 to P.17 besides 3 material objects were exhibited as M.O.1 to M.O.3.

4. After completing the examination of the prosecution witnesses, incriminating circumstances culled out from the evidence of the prosecution witnesses were put before the accused by questioning under Section 313 Cr.P.C. However, the accused denied the same as false and pleaded not guilty. On the side of the defence, no oral or documentary evidence were produced.

5. On conclusion of trial after hearing the arguments advanced on either side and also considering the materials, the learned Principal Sessions Judge not found the accused guilty for the offence punishable under Section 135(1) (a) of Indian Electricity Act and Section 304(ii) of IPC and thereby, acquitted them. Aggrieved over the said Judgment acquittal, the defacto complainant who is the wife of the deceased has filed the present appeal before this Court against the accused/respondents 2 and 3 herein.

6. The specific case of the prosecution is that the respondents 2 and 3 have been arrayed as A1 and A2 and they are father and son respectively. The 2nd respondent has owned a property of 3 acres in S.No. 46/01. In the said land, the respondents 2 and 3 without getting permission from the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, by using hooks, had diverted power supply and formed an electric fence illegally through Aluminium wire lines around their groundnut field in order to ensure that the wild boars get caught in the electric fencing knowing well that it may endanger to the human life. On 05.10.2017 at about 6 a.m., the husband of the defacto complainant had gone to his field and while coming through the field of the accused/respondents 2 and 3, he sustained electric shock from the electric fencing and died due to the effect of electric shock. Hence, the case was registered against the respondents 2 and 3 herein.

7. The learned counsel for t