Proper identification of an accused requires reliable procedures, and cases with significant inconsistencies in evidence should raise reasonable doubts regarding conviction.

JUDGMENT :

M. NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

1. The appellant/accused in S.C.No.70 of 2016 was convicted by the trial Court by the judgment dated 03.10.2022 for the offences under Sections 448, 392 r/w 397 of I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo one year simple imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to undergo one month simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 448 of I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default to undergo six months simple imprisonment for the offences under Sections 392 r/w 397 of I.P.C. Aggrieved against the said conviction, the appellant/accused filed this appeal.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the de facto complainant/PW1 is a resident of Papparapatti village, Pennagaram Taluk and is running Shri Vinayaga Textiles shop in Papparapatti bazaar street. His daughter-in-law/PW2 was alone at home. On 27.07.2013, at about 3.00 p.m., the appellant trespassed into the house of PW1 on the guise of pledging some gold jewel. PW2 informed him that jewels were not pledged at home and he has to go to the shop of PW1. At that time, the appellant asked for water. When PW2 had gone to bring the water, the appellant followed her, brandished a knife, threatened her and asked her to hand over the jewels and cash available in the house. When PW2 resisted, the appellant pulled her and her face banged to the wall, thereafter inflicted a cut injury using the knife and removed Thali/M.O.1. PW2 raised alarm, shouted and the appellant locked the door from inside, thereafter finding neighbours gathering, he climbed the stairs and went up. PW2 fainted and fell down the floor. The neighbours on hearing the alarm sound, informed PW1/father-in-law and PW3/husband of the victim. PW3, who is the Head Master, informed the local residents to break open the window and enter the house. In the meanwhile, PW1 also reached there. Thereafter, the glass pane of the window was broken, the main door was broken open. PW3/husband and PW4/brother- in-law of the victim reached by then. All entered the house, found the victim lying in the floor with blood injuries. Thereafter, PW3 and PW7 took the injured to the Shanjaya hospital, Dharmapuri, where PW15 admitted her on the same day at about 4.30 p.m. and had given treatment. The victim initially took treatment in the Dharmapuri hospital, thereafter she was taken to Manipal Hospital in Bangalore, where PW10/Doctor had given further treatment.

3. PW1 lodged a complaint/Ex.P1 to the respondent and F.I.R. registered at about 5.00 p.m. in Crime No.160 of 2013 for offence under Section 397 of I.P.C. PW11, the Inspector, who was in-charge of Papparapatti Police Station, received F.I.R./Ex.P8, visited the scene of occurrence, prepared observation mahazar, rough sketch in presence of witnesses, enquired the witnesses present in the scene of occurrence. In the scene of occurrence, he saw the broken window glasses, blood stains in the house leading upto the terrace of the house. From the blood stains it was noticed that the accused jumped to the next compound of Gowri Krishna Marriage Hall, thereafter the police had gone there and found one of the bathrooms was locked inside. Thereafter the accused was caught in presence of the witnesses. From the accused M.O.1/gold chain and M.O.11/paper cutting knife seized. Thereafter the accused remanded for judicial cust