Conviction requires credible evidence beyond reasonable doubt, and reliance on prior uncharged cases without appropriate evidence is improper.

ORDER :

1. The petitioner in Crl.RC.No.646 of 2023 is arrayed as A3, the petitioner in Crl.RC.No.405 of 2023 is arrayed as A1 and the petitioner in Crl.RC.No.1685 of 2022 is arrayed as A2.

2. These criminal revision petitions are filed by the petitioners/A1 to A3 challenging the conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court in C.C.No.8 of 2021 by judgment dated 31.03.2021 wherein A1 was convicted for offence under Section 458 IPC and sentenced to undergo three years rigorous imprisonment, for offence under Section 34 2 IPC to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to undergo three months simple imprisonment, for offence under Section 380 IPC to undergo three years rigorous imprisonment and the sentence to run consecutively, A2 was convicted for offence under Section 458 IPC and sentenced to undergo three years rigorous imprisonment, for offence under Section 34 2 IPC to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to undergo three months simple imprisonment, for offence under Section 380 r/w. 34 IPC to undergo three years rigorous imprisonment and the sentences to run consecutively, A3 was convicted for offence under Section 458 IPC and sentenced to undergo three years rigorous imprisonment, for offence under Section 34 2 IPC to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to undergo three months simple imprisonment, for offence under Section 380 IPC to undergo three years rigorous imprisonment and the sentences to run consecutively.

3. Aggrieved against the conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court, A1 preferred an appeal in C.A.No.87 of 2021, A2 and A3 preferred an appeal in C.A.No.113 of 2021 before the Special Court for Trial of Case registered under SC/ST(POA) Act, Namakkal. The learned Sessions Judge by judgment dated 18.07.2022 dismissed the appeals confirming the conviction and sentence imposed by the Trial Court. Against which, the present criminal revision petitions filed.

4. For the sake of convenience, the petitioners are referred to as per their rankings in the Trial Court.

5. The gist of the case is that on 26.02.2021 at about 4.15 a.m., the petitioners/A1 to A3 with an intention to commit theft trespassed into Sethukkal Mariamman Kovil, Paramathi, Namakkal District, assaulted the watchman/PW1, illegally detained him and kept him locked in a room. A2 was standing as guard to PW1. A1 and A3 broke opened the lock of the temple shrine and stolen the silver crown/MO1 and ½ sovereign Thali Potu/MO2, thereby committed the offence under Sections 458 , 342, 380 and 380 r/w. 34 IPC. PW1 through his mobile informed PW5/trustee of the temple about the incident. PW5 called PW3/another trustee and informed PW4/hereditary poojari about the incident. All three reached the temple found the watchman locked inside the room, opened the door and PW1 narrated the incident. Thereafter, they lodged a complaint with PW7/Sub- Inspector of Police. Since PW1 was not conversant to write, PW4 wrote the complaint. PW7 registered FIR, visited the scene of occurrence, prepared observation mahazar and rough sketch in the presence of witnesses, recorded their statements and handed over the investigation to PW8/Inspector of Police. On the same day at about 3.00 p.m., PW8 found the accused in a suspicious manner with a bike near Karupannar temple. When they were questioned, they gave contradictory statements and thereafter they were arrested, gave confession, A1 produced MO1 and MO2 from the bike and all the accused produced before the Magistrate for remand and the properties were sent to the Court. On completion of investigation, charge sheet filed.

6. During trial, on the side of prosecution PW1 to P