Failure to conduct a Test Identification Parade renders dock identification of a stranger unreliable, necessitating strong corroborative evidence for conviction.

JUDGMENT

The Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction made in S.C.No.353 of 2013, dated 25.08.2023, on the file of the Assistant Sessions Judge, Valliyoor.

2. The appellant is the first accused in S.C.No.353 of 2013, facing charges under Sections 454 and 397 I.P.C., on the file of the Assistant Sessions Court, Valliyoor.

3. The case of the prosecution is that on 21.12.2008 at around 13.40 hours, while the accused 2 and 3 watched from Mudukku Theru, west of Cinema Theatre, the first accused tresspassed into the house of the complainant – Thamarai Selvi, residing in Panakudi Mela Azad street and pushed her down, gagged her with clothes and attacked her with an Aruval, causing grievous injuries on her chin. The first accused also snatched a one-sovereign gold chain from her. The accused have allegedly committed the offences punishable under Sections 454, 397 and 34 I.P.C.

4. The learned Judicial Magistrate, Valliyoor has taken the charge sheet on file in P.R.C.No.47 of 2009 and furnished the copies of records under Section 207 Cr.P.C., on free of costs. The learned Magistrate finding that the offence under Section 397 I.P.C., is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, after compliance under Sections 208 and 209 Cr.P.c., had committed the case to the file of the Principal District and Sessions Court, Tirunelveli and the same was taken on file in S.C.No.353 of 2013 and thereafter the case was made over to the Assistant Sessions Court, Valliyoor.

5. After appearance of the accused, the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, on hearing both sides and on perusal of records, being satisfied that there existed a prima facie case against the accused, framed charges under Sections 454 and 397 I.P.C., against the first accused and under Sections 454 r/w 34 I.P.C., as against the third accused Kumaravel and the same were read over and explained to them and on being questioned, they denied the charges and pleaded not guilty. Since the second accused Kannan died on 11.01.2020, the case as against him was ordered to be abated.

6. The prosecution, to prove its case, examined 8 witnesses as P.W.1 to P.W.8, exhibited 8 documents as Exs.P.1 to P.8 and marked 2 material objects as M.O.1 and M.O.2.

7. The case of the prosecution emerging from the evidence adduced on their side, in brief is as follows:

(a) P.W.1 – Thamarai Selvai – defacto complainant is the wife of P.W.2 – Prabhakaran and are residing in a tenanted premise at Panagudi. P.W.1 is a home maker. On 21.12.2008, P.W.2 went to Nanguneri to attend their association meeting. P.W.1 was in her house along with her five months old baby. When P.W.1 was cooking, at about around 1.00p.m., a person wearing a T-shirt and lungi approached her and enquired about the occupants of P.W.1's house previously. P.W.1 replied that they were residing at Anna nagar. At that time, that person requested water and also a pen to note down the address. As the pen was not working, he requested for another.. When P.W.1 turned to get another pen, the said person entered and pushed her down, gagging her with clothes to prevent her from shouting. When P.W.1 started shouting, he attacked her with an Aruval on her right chin and snatched the gold chain from her neck.

(b) Due to heavy bleeding and giddiness, P.W.1 lay there for some time, before managing to reach P.W.3's house and inform them about the incident. P.W.3 Immediately took P.W.1 to a nearby Iyer Hospital, but they refused to admit her citing it