Eyewitness testimony, accused's conduct, confession, and forensic evidence prove attempted robbery and murder beyond doubt despite minor investigative lapses.

JUDGMENT :

R.POORNIMA, J.

This Criminal Appeal is filed against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Mahila Court, Pudukkottai, in S.C. No.42 of 2017 dated 30.01.2023 and consequently to acquit the appellant.

2. The complaint was lodged by P.W.1, the husband of the deceased under Ex.P.1 with the following averments :

(i) On 19.10.2016, he received information that his wife was found lying in a pool of blood with injuries. Immediately, he rushed to his house and found his wife with a stab injury on the left side of her neck. He immediately took her to the hospital for treatment at about 3.40 p.m., where she was declared brought dead.

(ii) The complaint was lodged at about 16.50 hours. On the same day, at about 16.50 hours, the FIR was registered under Section 302 IPC against an unknown person. The FIR was registered by P.W.9, Tmt.Jeyasri, Sub-Inspector of Police.

(iii) P.W.10, Thiru.Tamilmaran, Inspector of Police, took up the investigation. He proceeded to the place of occurrence and prepared the Observation Mahazar (Ex.P2) and Rough Sketch (Ex.P9). He also recovered a yellow and ash-coloured cell phone, another grey-coloured cell phone, a pair of slippers, ordinary soil, and blood-stained soil (M.O.1 to M.O.5) under a recovery mahazar (Ex.P3). He conducted an inquest on the dead body and prepared the Inquest Report (Ex.P11). Thereafter, on 24.10.2016, he arrested the accused, recorded his confession statement, and recovered M.O.6 to M.O.8 under recovery mahazar (Ex.P5). He sent all the material objects to the Judicial Magistrate Court and also sent a requisition to the Judicial Magistrate for forwarding the blood-stained material objects for chemical analysis.

(iv) Dr. Kirthiga, who conducted the post-mortem on the dead body, found the following injuries:

“An elliptical-shaped wound seen on the right supraclavicular region measuring 3 cm in length × 3 cm in breadth with approximately 15 cm depth.

Rupture of major blood vessels.

Thorax – repair of major blood vessels; massive blood clots seen; punctured wound seen on the superior lobe of the right lung.”

Opinion as to cause of death:

The deceased would appear to have died due to injury to the major blood vessels and injury to the vital organ, namely the right lung.”

(v) He received the Serology Report (Ex.P15) and the Biological Report (Ex.P16).

(vi) On 24.12.2016, he altered the section of law from Section 302 IPC to Sections 393, 397, and 302 IPC under the Alteration Report (Ex.P17). After completing the investigation, on the same day, he filed the final charge sheet against the accused.

3. On receipt of the records, the Judicial Magistrate, Pudukkottai, took cognizance of the case in P.R.C. No.4 of 2017 against the accused and completed all necessary formalities. Copies of the relevant documents were furnished to the accused in compliance with Section 207 Cr.P.C. Upon satisfaction of the statutory requirements, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions.

4. Thereafter, the Mahila Court, Pudukkottai, after complying with the requisite formalities, framed charges against the accused under Sections 393 and 302 IPC. The charges were read over and explained to the accused. The accused denied the charges and claimed to be tried. Therefore, the case was posted for trial.

5. On the side of the prosecution, P.W.1 to P.W.10 were examined and Exs.P1 to P17 were marked. Material Objects M.O.1 to M.O.11 were produced. On the side of the accused, no witness was examined and documents were marked as Exs.D1 to D4.

6. On conclusion of the trial, the learned Mahila Court, Pudukkotta