Circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain pointing to guilt, with the prosecution required to establish every link beyond reasonable doubt.

JUDGMENT :

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

PRAYER: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code to set aside the conviction and sentence passed against this Appellant/accused by the learned Sessions Judge, Mahalir Neethi Mandram (Mahila Court), Cuddalore in S.C. No. 232 of 2015 dated 11.11.2016.

The instant criminal appeal has been filed by the accused against the order of conviction passed in S.C. No. 232 of 2015, dated 11.11.2016.

2. The brief facts which give rise to the instant Criminal Appeal are that this is a case of uxoricide. According to the prosecution, the accused doubted the fidelity of his wife. While so, on 16.03.2015, he assaulted the deceased with a grinding stone. Then she complained the same to her father, on his advice, the deceased again went to her matrimonial home. However, on the next day, i.e., 17.03.2015, at about 11:00 o'clock, the accused developed a wordy quarrel with the deceased and suddenly slit her throat and fled from the scene of occurrence. Owing to the injury, the deceased succumbed on the spot.

3. After coming to know of the occurrence and the involvement of the accused, PW1/Saminathan, who is the father of the deceased, immediately rushed to the scene of occurrence, and thereafter went to the Police Station to give Ex.P1/complaint, which was received by PW9/Marimuthu, the Sub Inspector of Police, and who registered an FIR in Crime No. 84 of 2015 at about 12:30 hours. He also made arrangements to forward a copy of the First Information Report to the concerned jurisdictional Magistrate, as well as to the Investigating Officer, PW10/Chandrababu.

4. The Investigation Officer, after receipt of the copy of the First Information Report, proceeded to the scene of occurrence at about 13:15 hours, and prepared two rough sketches, and an observation mahazar in the presence of PW7/Shenbagavalli, and one Balu. On the very same day, at about 14:15 hours, the blood-stained cement flooring, as well as plain cement flooring, were collected. The Investigating Officer also seized the blood-stained bed, and pillow. At about 14:45 hours, the Investigating Officer collected blood-stained soil and sample soil from the place where the deceased fell outside her residence. At 15:00 hours, he conducted an inquest in the presence of PW1/Saminathan, PW2/Sheshayee, PW3/Sivanantham, and other witnesses and thereafter, made arrangements for the post-mortem of the body of the deceased. He then recorded the statements of PW1 to PW3 and one Velmurugan.

5. It appears that on 17.03.2015, at about 18:00 hours, the accused surrendered before PW7/Shenbagavalli [VAO] and gave an extra-judicial confession. PW7/Shenbagavalli, produced the accused before the Police Station at about 20:10 hours, wherein, the accused again gave a voluntarily confession statement before the Police. In furtherance thereof, at about 21:45 hours, a discovery of facts was effected by recovering the Super Max Stainless Blade, from the accused's house. This recovery was made in the presence of PW7/Shenbagavalli, and Balu. Further, the blood-stained shirt and lungi were also recovered from the accused.

6. The Investigating Officer had then forwarded all those material objects to the concerned jurisdictional Magistrate under Form 95. He also made arrangements to send the blood-stained material objects for forensic examination. Later since he had superannuated, the investigation was taken over by his successor, PW11/Elumalai, who had recorded the statements of the forensic expert, the post-mortem doctor, and other witnesses who assisted in lifting the body from the scene of occurrence. Thus, after collecting the forensic report and completing the investigation, he laid the charge sheet against the accused under Sections 490A and 302 of IPC.

7. Before the Trial Court, the prosecution relied on as many as 11 witnesses and marked 20 documents, apart from relying on 9 material objects. On behalf of the accused, no witnesses were examined and no material objec