The prosecution's failure to provide corroborating evidence regarding the appellant's involvement in the murder led to the acquittal, reinforcing the principle that guilt must be established beyond a reasonable doubt.

JUDGMENT :

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

This appeal has been preferred as against the Judgment passed in S.C.No.110 of 2022 dated 11.06.2025, on the file of the I Additional District Court (PCR), Tiruchirappalli.

2.The case of the prosecution is that A.1 and A.2 are brothers and A.3 is a friend of A.1 and A.2. A.1 fell in love with the younger sister of the deceased and married her without the consent of her family. After the marriage, they were living separately. Due to this, there was continuous enmity and no cordial relationship between A.1 and deceased's family.

3.While being so, on 25.04.2021, at about 11.15 a.m., when the deceased and his family members were returning to their house after taking bath, some by two wheeler and others by walking, near a goat shed, the accused wrongfully restrained the deceased and scolded him in filthy language. They picked up a quarrel with him and A1 went to his house and brought a knife and stabbed the deceased on his left thigh, thereby severing a major artery, causing a fatal injury and heavy bleeding. The other two accused also attacked the deceased with a wooden log on his head. Immediately, the deceased was taken to the Government Hospital, Lalgudi, where he was declared brought dead due to excessive blood loss. On the complaint, the respondent registered the F.I.R in Crime No.290 of 2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 294 (b), 341 and 302 of I.P.C. After completion of investigation, a final report was filed and the same has been taken cognizance by the trial Court.

4.In order to bring the charges to home, the prosecution had examined P.W.1 to P.W.17 and marked Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.20. The prosecution produced Material Objects M.O.1 to M.O.5. On the side of the accused, no witnesses were examined and no documents were produced before the trial Court.

5.On perusal of oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court found accused Nos.1 to 3 guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 341 and 302 of I.P.C. They were sentenced to undergo life imprisonment each and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- each, in default to undergo three months Rigorous Imprisonment each for the offence punishable under Section 302 of I.P.C and they were sentenced to undergo one month Simple Imprisonment each and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- each, in default to undergo one week Simple Imprisonment each for the offence punishable under Section 341 of I.P.C. Aggrieved by the same, A.3 as appellant has preferred the present appeal.

6.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the appellant is arrayed as A3 and even according to the case of the prosecution, he is only a friend of A1 and A2. It was contended that the statement was recorded in the hospital and the F.I.R was registered in Crime No.290 of 2021, which was marked as Ex.P7. However, P.W.7, the wife of the deceased, deposed that she came to the police station and lodged a written complaint, which was received by P.W.6 and marked as Ex.P.6. The earliest version of the complaint, which was given at the hospital by P.W.7 itself was suppressed by the prosecution, as it would affect the entire case of the prosecution.

7.The learned counsel further submitted that the accused also sustained injuries, which were suppressed by the prosecution. This fact was categorically admitted by P.W.7 and P.W.17 and there was no explanation for the injuries sustained by the accused. Only one stab injury was found in the left thigh of the deceased, which was the cause of the death. The Doctor who conducted postmortem deposed that only one injury was found in the dead body on the