The conviction was upheld based on corroborative eyewitness accounts despite minor discrepancies in evidence.

JUDGMENT :

G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

This appeal arises out of the Judgment passed in S.C.No.87 of 2018, dated 03.09.2022, on the file of learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Pattukottai, thereby convicting the appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 506(ii)and 302 of I.P.C.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the deceased and his son, Riaz Khan, were running a grocery shop, where P.W.2 was working as a labourer. The accused frequently used to purchase grocery items from the said shop both on cash and credit basis. One month prior to the occurrence, when the deceased and P.W.1 asked the deceased to pay the balance amount, the accused, without repaying the same, uttered that despite running the shop in his village, they were insisting on payment of the balance amount.

3.While being so, on 06.01.2018 at about 03.30 p.m., when the deceased, his son and the labourer were present in the shop, the accused, with an intention to do away with the life of the deceased, came to the shop armed with a knife, scolded him using filthy language, abused him by referring to his religion and thereafter stabbed him on his left chest. As a result, the deceased sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the same. On the complaint, the respondent registered an F.I.R in Crime No.5 of 2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 302 and 506(ii) of I.P.C. After completion of investigation, a final report was filed and the same has been taken cognizance by the trial Court.

4.In order to bring the charges to home, the prosecution had examined P.W.1 to P.W.17 and marked Ex.P1 to P20. The prosecution had produced Material Objects M.O.1 to M.O.8. On the side of the accused, no witnesses were examined and no documents were produced before the trial Court.

5.On perusal of oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court found the accused guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 302 and 506(ii) of I.P.C. He was sentenced to undergo three months Simple Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in default, to undergo one month Simple Imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 294(b) of I.P.C. He was also sentenced to undergo 12 months Rigorous Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default, to undergo one month Simple Imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 506(ii) of I.P.C. He was also sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- in default, to undergo three months Simple Imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 302 of I.P.C. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal has been preferred by the appellant.

6.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the prosecution failed to prove the arrest and recovery of the appellant. According to the prosecution, the appellant himself brought the knife with the intention to do away with the life of the deceased, but no witness has spoken to prove the same. Even according to the case of the prosecution, the knife was recovered after recording his confession statement. However, P.W.1, who is one of the eyewitnesses, deposed that the knife was dropped by the appellant at the scene of crime and thereafter was handed over to the Investigating Officer.

7.P.W.1 also admitted that he had seen the appellant in police custody at the police station. Therefore, the arrest and recovery of M.O.1 are not proved by the prosecution, which is fatal to the case of the prosecution. The complaint lodged by P.W.1 is not the first information, as it came into existence only after the Investigating Officer commenced the investigation by recording the statements of P.W.1 and other witnesses. Hence, it is hit by the provision of Section 16