V.S. Sirpurkar, J. — Appellant herein challenges his conviction for the offence under Section 302 and 392 read with Section 397 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter called ‘IPC’ for short) by the Trial Court and its confirmation by the Appellate Court. The prosecution case, is as follows.

2. The Appellant Pannayar was charged with the aforementioned offences on the allegation that on the night between 18.1.1995 and 19.1.1995, he committed the murder of one Thilagavalli (deceased) and also committed theft of the gold ornaments worn by her. The prosecution examined as many as 13 witnesses and relied on 22 documents and also pointed out the 15 material objects. Thilagavalli was married to Subbiah Naicker (PW-1). She was a working woman in the mid-day meal scheme. They used to live in Village Keelamarikadu in Tamil Nadu. On the fateful day, she told her husband at about 8.30 p.m. that she would be going out for attending the nature’s call towards south side of the Village. The prosecution alleged that normally, the villagers went near the pond called Kanmai (local tank). When she did not return till 9’O clock, he (Subbiah) started her search alongwith his son. However, they did not go till end of Kanmai. They made the search throughout the night, but to no effect. In the morning, one Ponnuthai, who had gone to attend the call of nature, informed the son of the deceased that Thilagavalli was lying on the west side of Kanmai. Therefore, they went there at about 6.30 a.m. only to find that Thilagavalli was lying dead there. She was no more and suffered injuries on her head, forehead, as also on the left side of the mouth. She did not have on her body, the ornaments, namely, gold chain weighing three sovereign, her bowl type thali and also the ear studs, worth about Rs. 10,000/- to Rs. 12,000/-. Subbiah (PW-1), therefore, contacted one Raja, the Village Administrative Officer of his village and lodged a complaint with him. Both of them then went and lodged a report in the Police Station almost immediately. In that, he narrated the whole story including the details of the lost ornaments. He referred to a “pair of ear studs” as missing. On the basis of this, investigation started. The body was sent for post-mortem, wherein it was established that the deceased had suffered anti-mortem injuries. On the next day, her funeral took place in the same village, which was allegedly attended by the accused also. The relatives also attended the said funeral including Thiru Alwarsamy (PW-4). Ultimately, on the basis of this investigation, the accused was arrested after 12 days in the dispensary of one Doctor Anandraj, examined as PW-7. It was found that the accused had suffered some injuries, which were grievous injuries, being fractures. He had suffered the fracture on lower 3rd right tibia, middle 3rd left ulna and oblique fracture lower 3rd right tibia. He was also medically examined. The prosecution claims that at the time he was arrested, the accused produced the aforementioned ornaments including the gold chain and the thali, and conveyed that he had sold one ear stud to Shankar (PW-6), who ran a jewellery shop in Kovilpatti. The investigating team went to the said shop and seized “one pair of ear studs”. At the time when the accused was arrested, his clothes were also seized, which were blood stained and one lathi and one aruval (a sharp weapon) were also seized on the information supplied by the accused. On this basis, the prosecution filed the chargesheet and sought for the conviction of the accused.

3. Since the Accused abjured his guilty, he was tried by the Additional District and Sessions Judge cum Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamarajar District, Srivilliputhur, who accepted the prosecution story based entirely on the circumstantial evidence. The High Court confirmed the verdict of conviction and the sentence, necessitating the present appeal.

4. The Learned Counsel, appearing on behalf of the appellant mainly contended that the wh