The conviction of the appellants was upheld based on credible eyewitness testimony corroborating the prosecution’s case beyond reasonable doubt, despite hostile witnesses and challenges to the FIR process.

JUDGMENT :

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

These appeals are directed as against the Judgment passed in Sessions Case No.82 of 2019, dated 14.07.2022 on the file of the learned VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Madurai District thereby convicting the appellants for the offences punishable under Sections 148 , 302 read with 149, 506(ii) of I.P.C.

2.The case of the prosecution is that on 18.10.2018, at about 08.45 p.m., when the deceased was sitting and looking at his mobile phone in front of the house of P.W.1, all the accused came there with a previous motive to do away with the life of the deceased and unlawfully assembled in front of the Devenrakula Vellalar Community Hall, carrying deadly weapons. Thereafter, A.1 scolded the deceased using filthy language. Upon seeing them, the deceased started to run from the place, but all the accused assaulted him with deadly weapons, leading to his murder. Due to the grievous injuries, he died on the spot.

3.On the complaint, the respondent registered the F.I.R in Crime No.954 of 2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 147 , 148, 294(b), 341, 302 and 506(ii) read with 34 of I.P.C as against 8 accused. After completion of the investigation, a final report was filed and the same was taken cognizance by the Trial Court. The Trial Court framed charges as against A.1 to A.4 for the offences punishable under Sections 148 , 302 read with 149 and 506(ii) of I.P.C and framed charge as against A.1 for the offence punishable under Section 294 (b) of I.P.C.

4.In order to bring the charges to home, the prosecution examined P.W.1 to P.W.30 and marked Exs.P1 to P16. The prosecution also produced Material Objects M.O.1 to M.O.21. On the side of the accused, no witnesses were examined and no documents were produced before the Trial Court.

5.On perusal of the oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court found A.1 to A.3 guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 148 , 302 read with 149 and 506(ii) of I.P.C and found A.4 guilty for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with 149 and 506(ii) of I.P.C. A.1 to A.3 were sentenced to undergo three years Rigorous Imprisonment each and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- each in default to undergo three months Simple Imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 148 of I.P.C. A.1 to A.4 were sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment each and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- each in default, to undergo one year Simple Imprisonment for the offence punishable under read with 149 of I.P.C. A.1 to A.4 were sentenced to undergo seven years Rigorous Imprisonment each and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- each in default, to undergo six months Simple Imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 506 (ii) of I.P.C. Aggrieved by the same, the appellants have filed the present Criminal Appeal.

6.The learned counsels appearing for the appellants submitted that although the respondent registered the F.I.R as against eight accused persons and charge-sheeted six of them, two of whom were juveniles, immediately after the alleged occurrence, the deceased was taken to the Government Rajaji Hospital, Madurai, where the statement of P.W.1 was recorded, and the F.I.R. was registered by P.W.23. According to P.W.1, the complaint was received at the police station and the F.I.R. was registered. Therefore, the very genesis of the complaint itself is in question, and the prosecution failed to prove it. Despite this, the Trial Court mechanically convicted the accused. The prosecution mainly relied on the testimonies of P.W.1, P.W.2, and P.W.10, who are the eyewitnesses. However, even according to the complaint, they only heard the voice