Judgment :- S. Ashok Kumar, J. The appellant is the sole accused in Sessions Case No.82 of 2000 on the file of Principal Sessions Judge, Sivagangai. He was tried for the offences punishable under Sections 449, 302, 324, 324 and 352 I.P.C. After trial the trial court found him guilty and convicted him under Sections 449 302, 324 (two counts) and 352 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo imprisonment as stated below: (i) Under Section 449 IPC - 3 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default to undergo three months rigorous imprisonment. (ii) Under Section 302 IPC - Life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/-, in default to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment. (iii) Under Section 324 IPC(two counts) - One year rigorous imprisonment for each count and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default to undergo three months rigorous imprisonment. (iv) Under Section 352 IPC - Fine of Rs.250/-, in default to undergo one month simple imprisonment. The trial court also directed the sentences to run concurrently. Aggrieved over the said conviction and sentence, the accused has preferred this appeal. 2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as follows. (a)The deceased in the case is the wife of the accused. P.Ws.1 and 2 are the father and mother of the deceased. P.W.3 is the co-brother of P.W.1 and P.W.2 is the elder sister of P.W.3's wife. Three years prior to 18.10.1999 (four years before the trial of the case), the accused and the deceased were married and after the marriage, they went to Mumbai to eke their livelihood. At Mumbai, the accused came addicted to alcohol and he has pledged 13 sovereigns of gold jewels, which belonged to the deceased and also sold the household articles for the purpose of purchasing liquor and very often he used to beat the deceased. (b) P.Ws.1 and 2 got information about the activities of the accused through one Kasinathan. P.Ws.1 and 2 questioned the father of the accused Palanivelu. The said Palanivelu directed his son Karunamoorthi to accompany P.Ws.1 and 2 to Mumbai and when they went to Mumbai, P.Ws.1 and 2 saw their daughter admitted in a hospital for treatment for the injuries sustained at the hands of the accused. After treatment, they brought her daughter and the accused to Thogavoor and made them to live separately. The said Palanivelu directed his son Karunamoorthi to accompany P.Ws.1 and 2 to Mumbai and when they went to Mumbai, P.Ws.1 and 2 saw their daughter admitted in a hospital for treatment for the injuries sustained at the hands of the accused. After treatment, they brought her daughter and the accused to Thogavoor and made them to live separately. At Thogavoor also, the accused abused the deceased and drove her to her parental house. Thereafter, in the presence of one Madhavan, there was a panchayat and in which the accused was advised and the deceased was sent with her husband. Within one month thereafter, the accused sold the clothes of the deceased and also her 'thali' and drove her away. The deceased Vallimayil took shelter in her parents house. (c) Some time prior to 18.10.1999, the accused came with a knife and demanded his wife to be sent along with him, for which P.W.1 refused. At that time, the accused showed a knife and threatened that he will kill his wife. One Kannusamy, who was residing four houses away, came there and advised the accused and sent him away. (d) On 18.10.1999, at about 1.00 a.m., P.Ws.1 and 2 were sleeping in their house along with her daughter Vallimayil. P.W.3 was also sleeping in the same house and the door was not locked. All of a sudden, the accused came inside at 1.00 a.m. and cut the deceased indiscriminately with aruval and on the alarm raised by the Vallimayil, P.Ws.1 to 3 saw the accused cutting the deceased. When they tried to catch him, the accused cut on the left index finger of P.W.1 and also on left thumb of P.W.2. When P.W.3 also tried to catch him, the accused pushed him and ran away. The injured Vallimayil was taken in a van arranged by one Subramaniam, Panchayat President. When the injured was taken to Ilayankudi Government Hospital, the medical officer who examined the injured Vallimayil declared that she was already dead. (e) On receipt of phone message from Government hospital, Ilayankudi, P.W.11 Inspector of Police, went to the hospital at 4.00 a.m. and recorded Ex.P-1 statement given by P.W.1. When the injured was taken to Ilayankudi Government Hospital, the medical officer who examined the injured Vallimayil declared that she was already dead. (e) On receipt of phone message from Government hospital, Ilayankudi, P.W.11 Inspector of Police, went to the hospital at 4.00 a.m. and recorded Ex.P-1 statement given by P.W.1. Based on Ex.P-1, P.W.11 Inspector of Police registered a case in Crime No.153 of 1999 under Sections 324 and 302 I.P.C. Ex.P-13 is the printed FIR and the same was sent to the Judicial Magistrate and the copies were sent to higher officials. (f) Thereafter, P.W.11 took up the investigation and went to the scene of occurrence at about 6.15 a.m. and drew Ex.P-14 rough sketch. In the presence of P.W.6 Nallathambi and one Vattayutham, he prepared Ex.P-3 observation mahazar. From the place of occurrence, he seized M.O.9 and M.O.10 bloodstained mats, M.O.11 bloodstained Pillow, M.Os.12 and 13 bloodstained Pillow Covers, M.O.14 bloodstained Lungi, M.O.15 bloodstained sari, M.O.16 bloodstained towel, M.O.17 bloodstained Blouse, M.O.18 bloodstained earth, M.O.19 sample earth and M.O.20 zero watt bulb under under Ex.P-4 mahazar in the presence witnesses. Thereafter, he proceeded to the Government Hospital and conducted inquest on the body of the deceased Vallimayil in the presence of Panchayatdars and prepared Ex.P-15 Inquest Report. After inquest, he examined P.Ws.1 to 3 and recorded their statements. He sent the body for postmortem through P.W.10 Head Constable with Ex.P-11 requisition. (g) On 18.10.1999 at about 11.15 a.m., P.Ws.8 and 9 conducted postmortem on the body of the deceased and found the following injuries. "INJURIES:- 1. 12x5x6cm lacerated injury extending from right upper part of ear upto right cheek. 5Cm from the angle of mouth exposing right maxilla, right ramus of mandible. Blood clots present. Wound gaping present. Bone chips present. On exploration of the wound:- Right parotid gland lacerated. Right facal artery veins and nerve torn. Blood clots present. Fracture right temporal bone (petrous part). Extent of the wound: On left side 2cm from midline right side 2 cm from the wound No.1. Below base of mandible above upper lip. 3. Incised wound of 12x1/2x1/2cm extending from middle of clavicle upto upper part of sternum. Tail end of wound on sternal side wound is curvilinear curvature towards left side. 4. Abrasion 5x1/2cm over the top of right breast. 5. An incised injury 14x3x2cm extending from left hand through palm upto base of left Index Finger. 3. Incised wound of 12x1/2x1/2cm extending from middle of clavicle upto upper part of sternum. Tail end of wound on sternal side wound is curvilinear curvature towards left side. 4. Abrasion 5x1/2cm over the top of right breast. 5. An incised injury 14x3x2cm extending from left hand through palm upto base of left Index Finger. Fracture I & II metacarpal bone. Blood clots present. Wound gaping present. 6. An incised wound of 4x1/2x1/2cm seen over the left thumb found on medial side." After postmortem, P.W.8 gave Ex.P-12 postmortem certificate opining that the deceased would appear to have died of shock and haemorrhage due to injuries to facial artery, veins and injury No.1 and fracture on the right temporal bone. The clothes of the deceased M.O.21 to M.O.24 found on her body were seized under Form 95 by P.W.10 and deposited in the Police Station. (h) On 19.10.1999, at about 3.00 p.m., at Ayyampatti Road, near a field, P.W.11 arrested the accused and the accused volunteered to give a confession, admissible portion of it is Ex.P-16 and pursuant to which, the accused took and produced cycle M.O.2 and P.W.11 seized it under Ex.P.5 Mahazar. On the same day at 5.00 p.m., the accused produced M.O.1 Aruval, M.O.3 bed sheet, M.O.4 shirt and M.O.5 key and they were seized by P.W.11 under Ex.P-6 mahazar in the presence of P.W.7 and one Chelliah. M.O.2 cycle was taken by the accused from the cycle company of one Kathiresan and the register maintained by the said Kathiresan is Ex.P-7 and it was seized under Ex.P-8 mahazar. The entry for the accused taking the cycle is Ex.P-17. (i) P.Ws.1 and 2 were given treatment by P.W.8 Dr.Asma Begam. P.W.1 had sustained an incised cut injury on the left index finger measuring 2 x ½ x ½ cm and P.W.2 has sustained an incised wound 1 x ½ x ½ cm in right index finger and an incised wound of same measurement in the left palm, near ring finger. Wound certificates issued to P.Ws.1 and 2 are Ex.P-9 and P-10. (j) P.W.12 Inspector of Police who took up the further investigation sent a requisition Ex.P-8 to the Court to send the case properties for chemical analysis. Accordingly, the case properties were subjected to chemical analysis and Ex.P-19 Chemical Examiner's Report and Ex.P-20 Serologist's report were received in the Court. Wound certificates issued to P.Ws.1 and 2 are Ex.P-9 and P-10. (j) P.W.12 Inspector of Police who took up the further investigation sent a requisition Ex.P-8 to the Court to send the case properties for chemical analysis. Accordingly, the case properties were subjected to chemical analysis and Ex.P-19 Chemical Examiner's Report and Ex.P-20 Serologist's report were received in the Court. P.W.12 Inspector of police completed the investigation and filed final report on 04.01.2000 against the accused. 3. On behalf of the prosecution, P.Ws.1 to 12 were examined as witnesses and Exhibits P-1 to 20 and M.Os.1 to 24 were marked. On behalf of the accused, no witness was examined and no document or M.Os. were marked. When the accused was questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C. about the incriminating circumstances appearing in the evidence of prosecution witnesses, he denied them either as false or not known. On considering the oral and documentary evidence produced by the prosecution, the learned trial judge found this appellant/accused guilty under Sections 449, 302, 324 (two counts) and 352 IPC, convicted him thereunder and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment as stated above. Hence this appeal. 4. Before this Court, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant would contend that the accused has been implicated in the case only on surmises and there is no reliable evidence to connect him with the crime. On the contrary, learned Additional Public Prosecutor would contend that P.Ws.1 and 2, the parents of the deceased, are injured eye witnesses and they have given cogent and clear evidence with regard to the nature of occurrence. 5. We have given our anxious consideration to the rival contentions of the counsel on either side and also perused the materials on record. 6. The deceased is none other than the wife of the accused. The deceased and the accused got married about three years prior to the occurrence and after marriage, they went to Mumbai to eke out their livelihood. 6. The deceased is none other than the wife of the accused. The deceased and the accused got married about three years prior to the occurrence and after marriage, they went to Mumbai to eke out their livelihood. It is alleged by the prosecution and also by P.Ws.1 and 2 that at Mumbai the accused became addicted to alcohol and has pledged 13 sovereigns of gold jewels, which belonged to the deceased and also sold the household articles and when they got information through a relative, P.Ws.1 and 2 questioned the father of the accused, who sent his one son Karunamoorthi along with P.Ws.1 and 2 to Mumbai and when they went to Mumbai, they saw their daughter in hospital taking treatment for the injuries sustained at the hands of the accused. It is the further case of the prosecution that after treatment, P.Ws.1 and 2 brought their daughter and the accused to Thogavoor and made them to live separately and there also the accused started giving ill-treatment to his wife and sold her clothes and also 'thali' and drove her away. Thereafter, the deceased came to reside with her parents. Few days prior to the occurrence also, the accused has gone to the residence of P.Ws.1 and 2 and demanded them that his wife should be sent with him and when P.Ws.1 and 2 refused, the accused has threatened to kill his wife. In continuation of such threat, on 18.10.1999 in the early morning at 1.00 a.m., while P.Ws.1 to 3 were sleeping with the deceased inside their house, taking advantage of not locking of the doors, the accused trespassed into the house of P.W.1 and indiscriminately cut his wife and when the deceased raised alarm, P.Ws.1 to 3 saw the accused cutting the deceased and tried to catch the accused, but the accused has inflicted injury on the hand of P.W.1, P.W.2 and pushed down P.W.3 and ran away from the scene of occurrence. Thereafter the injured has been taken to hospital in a van arranged by one Subramanian, Panchayat president, to Ilayankudi Government Hospital. When the deceased was taken to hospital, P.W.8, who was on duty, has examined her and found her dead. Thereafter the injured has been taken to hospital in a van arranged by one Subramanian, Panchayat president, to Ilayankudi Government Hospital. When the deceased was taken to hospital, P.W.8, who was on duty, has examined her and found her dead. On receipt of information at 3.35 a.m., through Phone Call, P.W.11 has reached Ilayankudi Police Station at 4.00 a.m., and after receipt of death intimation of the deceased and memo for treatment of P.Ws 1 and 2, he has recorded statement of P.W.1 at 4.00 a.m., After reaching the Police Station at 5.30 a.m., P.W.11, Inspector of Police, registered a case in Crime No.153/99 for offences under Sections 324 and 302 IPC and prepared Ex.P.13, Printed form of the First Information Report. Thus the FIR has reached the Court in time and thus there is no delay either in lodging the complaint, Ex.P.1 or the FIR reaching the Court. 7. P.Ws 1 and 2 are parents of the deceased. P.W.1 was first seen by P.W.8, Tmt.Azma Begum by 3.35 a.m.,on 18.10.1999 within about 2 ½ hours of the occurrence. At that time it was informed by PW.1 that the injury was caused on him at about 01.00 a.m., by a known person with Aruval at Therku Samuthiram and on examination, P.W.8 found an incised injury of 2 cm x ½ cm x ½ cm in the Palmer aspect of the left index finger and Ex.P.0 is the wound certificate. Similarly, P.W.2, Alagammal, mother of the deceased was also seen by P.W.8 at 3.50 a.m., on the same day and she also informed the Doctor that she sustained injuries at 1.00 a.m., on the same day by a known person with Aruval at her house at Therku Samuthiram and the Doctor has found (i) an incised wound 1 cm x ½ cm x ½ cm on the tip of right index finger in the Palmer aspect and (ii) another incised wound 1 cm x ½ cm x ½ cm in the Palmer aspect of left palm, near ring finger. Both injuries were simple in nature. According to P.Ws 1 and 2, they sustained injuries at the hands of the accused when they tried to prevent the accused from causing injuries to their daughter. Both injuries were simple in nature. According to P.Ws 1 and 2, they sustained injuries at the hands of the accused when they tried to prevent the accused from causing injuries to their daughter. The presence of P.Ws 1 and 2 at their house at about 1.00 am., on the date of occurrence is natural and therefore there is nothing to suspect the evidence of P.Ws 1 and 2. 8. Apart from the evidence of P.Ws 1 and 2, P.W.4 brother of P.W.1 who went to the place of occurrence on hearing the alarms of P.W.1 has also deposed before the court that when he went and saw his brother's daughter in a pool of blood, P.W.1 has informed him that it was his son-in-law who caused injuries on his daughter and on himself and at his request, he has arranged a Van from Salaigramam and took the deceased to Ilayankudi Government Hospital. 9. P.W.3 is the co-brother of P.W.1 (P.W.3 has marrked younger sister of P.W.2). He has also stated that on the date of occurrence in the house of P.W.1 when the accused caused injuries to the deceased, he tried to catch him, but the accused pushed him and ran away. Though P.W.3 and 4 are close relatives of P.W.1 and 2, there is no reason to suspect their presence at the time of occurrence. Even if the evidence of P.Ws 3 and 4 is eschewed there is the evidence of P.W.s 1 and 2, father and mother of the deceased who are injured eye witnesses. P.W.s 1 and 2 have given cogent evidence with regard to the motive, the wayward life of the accused in pledging and selling the jewels and even the dress materials of the deceased and also about the occurrence on the fateful day. 10. Apart from the ocular evidence of P.Ws 1 to 4, who are eye witnesses, there is another important circumstancial evidence, that is recovery of the weapon used for the commission of the offence and also matching of the blood group found on the weapon with that of the deceased. On 19.10.1999 i.e., about 32 hours of time of occurrence, the accused was arrested at the Bus stop near Vaiyampatti Junction in the presence of P.W.6, Village Administrative Officer and one Chellaiah. The accused volunteered to give a statement, admissible portion of which is Ex.P.16. On 19.10.1999 i.e., about 32 hours of time of occurrence, the accused was arrested at the Bus stop near Vaiyampatti Junction in the presence of P.W.6, Village Administrative Officer and one Chellaiah. The accused volunteered to give a statement, admissible portion of which is Ex.P.16. In pursuance of the said confession, the accused has produced the M.O.2, cycle which was hired by him, which was seized under a cover of Mahazar Ex.P.5. On the same day, at 5.00 pm., the accused produced M.O.3 Blanket, M.O.4, a white shirt and M.O.5, a bunch of keys and M.O.1 Aruval, from a hay-stock at Thugavur. The said M.Os were seized under a cover of Mahazar Ex.P.6. When all the case properties, (those seized in pursuance of the confession of the accused and those seized from the place of occurrence) were subjected to forensic examination at the request of the Investigation Officer, human blood was detected in M.Os 1, Aruval, M.O.2 shirt, M.O.22, Blouse, M.O.22 Saree, M.O.23, Petticoat, M.O.24, Towel, M.O.9 and 10, Grass mat, M.O.11, Pillow, M.Os.12 and 13, Pillow covers, M.O.14, Lungi, M.O.15, Cloth Piece, M.O.16, Towel, M.O.17 Blouse, M.O.18, Earth, M.O.16 Shirt, M.O.17, Saree and M.O.18 shirt. In all the above said material objects human blood of B group was found, as seen from Ex.P.20, Serology Report, dated 31.1.2000. M.O.4, shirt was worn by the accused. M.O.1 Billhook was the weapon used for the commission of the offence. The group of blood found in M.O.4 and M.O.1 used by the accused match with the blood stained dress worn by the deceased i.e., M.Os.21,22 and 23 respectively, Blouse, Saree and Petticoat. This important circumstantial evidence lends support to the ocular evidence of P.Ws 1 to 4. The evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution clearly establishes the guilt of the accused and we do not find any reason to interfere with the findings and conviction of the accused. Therefore, this Appeal deserves to be dismissed and the same is hereby dismissed.