The conviction based solely on the testimony of a single eyewitness is unsafe when contradictions arise, necessitating corroboration and adherence to procedural safeguards in evidence collection.

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

Challenging the judgment of conviction and sentence rendered by the Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Kumbakonam in S.C.No.66 of 2020, A1, A4, A2, A5 and A3 respectively have come up with the present Criminal Appeals.

2. The details of conviction and sentence in respect of each appellant are as under:-

3. The case of the prosecution elicited from the evidence of the prosecution witnesses and the documentary evidence produced is as under:-

i) A complaint, Ex.P1 came to be lodged by one Vijaya, PW1, wife of Ramanathan (deceased) with the Kumbakonam East Police Station on 15.3.2020 at about 8.00 pm contending as under:-

The complainant is a resident of Kumbakonam Pudhupalam Kaveri Karai Street alongwith her husband. Their marriage took place about 36 years ago and they have one son and one daughter. Their son by name Prabhu had committed suicide in the year 2005 itself. Their daughter Saranya was given in marriage in the year 2013 to one Govindaraj, cousin's son of PW1 and they have one child. The husband of PW1 was running a shop at Periyakadai Street in the name of ARD Vijaya Traders dealing with cattle feed. Their son-in-law Govindaraj was assisting the deceased leaving his wife and daughter at the matrimonial home and he used to visit them once in ten days. Whileso, for attending a function by name "Colour Kanavu" at Madurai, conducted by Gold Winner Company on 14.3.2020, PW1, alongwith her son-in-law, had departed on 13.3.2020 afternoon from Kumbakonam and after staying at Manachanallur in the house of son-in-law on that night, they all had attended the function at Madurai on 14.3.2020 and similarly, while returning, they had stayed at night at Manachanallur. Then, on 15.3.2020, at about 9.00 am, PW1 alone had departed from Manachanallur and on reaching Kumbakonam Mottai Gopuram at about 1.00 pm, she had called the deceased over mobile phone and on being picked up by her husband in a Scooty-two wheeler, she had returned her home. Then, PW1 and her husband, the deceased had their lunch, which had been provided by one of their relatives who lives in the neighbouring house and had a little nap. At about 5.00 pm, the deceased woke up, had a bath and after having a coffee provided by PW1, they both had been watching the television. Whileso, at about 7.00 pm, the calling bell rang and on hearing the door bell sound, the deceased opened the door. By then, two persons had entered into the house claiming that they had come to give an invitation and sought for a plate for presenting the invitation and accordingly, PW1 had given a plate to them. By pretending that they are are preparing to present the invitation, one of them had closed the doors of the house. While their act was being questioned by PW1, three more persons had entered into the house and by surrounding her, demanded for money and jewels. When questioned by PW1, two of them had beaten her and asked her to show the iron bureau and to open it. By that time, other three persons took the husband of PW1 into a room while the others had confined her in another room by tying up her hands, legs and mouth using a lungi cloth by tearing it. When she craved for sympathy, one of them had suggested for leaving her. Then, on opening the bureau, since they found nothing valuable, they snatched the two bangles and one ring worn by PW1. By that time, she had a scream and thereby, she rushed out of the room and noticed four persons stabbing her husband, who was tied in a plastic chair, and running away. PW1, raising hue and cry, opened the back door and called one Sathyabama. When all the family members of S