The conviction cannot stand where identification is doubtful, and crucial witnesses for corroboration of evidence are not examined, resulting in reasonable doubt.

ORDER

The petitioner convicted by judgment, dated 23.10.2019 in S.C.No.287 of 2016, by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Omalur and sentenced to undergo two years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default, to undergo two months simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 452 IPC and to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default to undergo six months simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 394 r/w. 397 . Aggrieved over the judgment of the trial Court, an appeal was filed by the petitioner before the Sessions Court in C.A.No.226 of 2019. The learned Principal Sessions Judge, Salem by judgment dated 26.06.2020 dismissed the appeal, confirming the judgment of the trial Court. Against which, the present revision is filed.

2.The case of the prosecution is that on 15.04.2013 at about 2:00 p.m. At Mailapalayam in Naranampalayam Village, the defacto complainant/PW1, Sarasu, was in her house, at that time, the petitioner/accused, who is a tree climber came there and asked for some water to drink. PW1 had given the water. Since it was warm, he asked for cold water from the fridge. The defacto complainant entered the house and opened the fridge to get the cold water, at that time, the petitioner followed her from behind and pulled the gold thali chain. When she resisted, the petitioner, using his Koduval, caused a cut injury on her neck. Shen she resisted, he attacked with Koduval resulting in indiscriminate cuts. The defacto complainant was pushed to the bedroom and the gold thali chain snatched and petitioner fled using his bicycle. The defacto complainant came out shouting in pain. PW2/neighbour heard the shout and saw the petitioner fleeing in a cycle. PW5, another neighbor, both came, saw the defacto complainant with blood injuries, immediately called 108 ambulance, by that time, her husband also came and they took the injured to the Government Hospital, Salem. PW8/Casualty Doctor examined the victim and issued accident register. Since the victim insisted further treatment to be taken at a private hospital, the victim along with her husband went to Manipal Hospital, Salem and PW10 examined and treated the injured. On getting information from the Hospital, PW9/Sub-Inspector of Police went to the Hospital and recorded the complaint as stated by PW1. Since both the hands of PW1 had cut injuries and bandaged, she could not sign instead her husband signed the complaint. The patient was found conscious in fit state of mind, certified by the Duty Medical Officer at Manipal Hospital. Thereafter, PW11 took up investigation, visited the scene of occurrence, prepared observation magazine/Ex.P2 and rough sketch/Ex.P10 in presence of witnesses. Further, in the scene of occurrence, gold beads and blood- stained soil seized. Information of the petitioner received and he was arrested on 16.04.2013 at about 6:30 a.m. in the presence of PW6/Village Administrative Officer and PW7/Village Assistant. The accused gave a confession and based on his confession, MO1, MO2, MO3, MO4, MO5, MO9 and MO10 seized. The Investigating Officer showed the seized MO1 to the PW1/defacto complainant, who identified that it was her thali chain, statements of witnesses, namely the neighbours, Doctors from the Government Hospital, Salem and the Doctor from Manipal Hospital, Salem recorded and medical records collected. On completion of investigation, charge sheet filed. During trial, PW1 to PW11 examined, Ex.P1 to Ex.P12 marked and MO1 to MO10 produced on the side of the prosecution. On conclusion of trial, the Trial Court convicted the petitioner as stated above. Against which, the petitioner preferred an appeal in Crl.A.No.226 of 2019. The learn