Circumstantial evidence must be corroborated by substantial forensic analysis; absence of direct witness testimony does not negate conviction if evidence establishes chain of culpability.

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was made by the Hon'ble P.VELMURUGAN J.

This criminal appeal is filed against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Ramanathapuram, in Special SC No.117 of 2018, dated 16/02/2022 and consequently to acquit the appellant/A1.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the de-facto complainant is the sister of the deceased Dharmar. She lodged a complaint stating that her younger brother Dharmar went to the Itampadal on 13.04.2011 at 04.00 pm, claiming that he went to Kalari, but did not return. When she contacted him on his phone number 9487337165, the same was switched off and that his relatives searched him, but could not find him. On the basis of the complaint given by the de-facto complainant, a case was registered under 'Man Missing'.

3.It is the further case of the prosecution that on 30/03/2016 at 10.30 am, one Pasupathi's son Murugesan from Panaiyadiyendhal appeared in person before the Village Administrative Officer Thiru.Muthusamy.

Upon receiving information that the vehicle driven by Dharmar, who had gone missing, had been found near Uthirakosamangai, according to the secret plan of Dharmar's wife Pandiammal, who had gone missing Dharmar, along with her friend Murugesan, Melamadai Ravi and two other friends, planned to kill Dharmar and make him disappear, in order to obstruct his illicit relationship with Dharmar's wife Pandiammal and to demand the return of the money received from Pandiammal to build a house and buy a Tractor. On 14/04/2011 at around 08.30 pm, on the road leading from Uthirakosamangai to Ithampadal, Dharmar was killed with a rope near the Appatha Uranie Vilaku road and Panaiyadiyenthal Murugesan, Melamadai Ravi and two others have been found guilty of the murder and have been buried in the Periyakanmai, north of Periyailai Bus Stop, west of Theriruveli. The Village Administrative Officer has recorded the statement that Ravi and others have broken Dharmar's motorcycle, a new blue colour TVS STAR CITY motorcycle without registration number, on the river path leading to Kalarikka, north of Panaiyadiyenthal, and have buried it separately. So, the FIR has been altered under Sections 120(B), 201 and 302 IPC.

4.After completing the investigation, the respondent Police filed a charge sheet before the Judicial Magistrate No.2, Ramanathapuram against the accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 342, 302, 201, 404, 120-B r/w 34 IPC and the same was taken on file as PRC No.1 of 2018. After completing the formalities, since the offences are triable exclusively by a Court of Session, the case was committed to the Principal District and Sessions Judge, and the same was taken on file as SC No.117 of 2018, for disposal.

5.After completing the formalities, since there were prima facie materials to frame charges against the accused, the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Ramanathapuram framed the charges for the offence punishable under Sections 120(B) IPC against A1 to A5; under Section 342 IPC against A1 to A4; under Section 302 IPC against A1 to A4; under Section 201 IPC against A1 to A4 and under Section 404 r/w 34 IPC as against A1 to A4.

6.In order to prove the charges against the accused, on the side of the prosecution, 37 witnesses were examined as PW1 to PW37 and 38 documents were marked as Exs.P1 to P38, besides marking 8 materials objections as MO1 to MO8. The superimposition report and DNA report were marked as Court document Exs.C1 and C2.

7.When the accused were questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C