Judgment : S. Sardar zackria hussain, J. The appellant is the sole accused in S.C. No. 148 of 2000 on the file of the Court of Principal Sessions Judge, Virudhunagar at Srivilliputhur. The accused is challenging the conviction and sentence imposed on the petitioner to undergo life imprisonment for the offence u/s. 302; one year Rigorous Imprisonment and Rs.500/- fine u/s. 364 of IPC, in default, one month simple imprisonment; and 6 months Rigorous Imprisonment and Rs.200/- fine u/s. 404 IPC in default 15 days simple imprisonment as per the Judgment dated 6.12.2001 in S.C. No. 148 of 2000 on the file of the Court of Principal Sessions Judge, Virudhunagar at Srivilliputhur. 2. Thefacts that led to the filing of this Appeal are as follows: P.W. 3 is the mother of the deceased, Thava Mary, the eldest daughter. P.W.4 Thamizhselvi is her second daughter. Her third daughter is Anbu Selvi. The husband of P.W. 3 Manivel is working in a hotel at Chennai. P.W.3 was residing with her three daughters in Keerani Village, Devakottai Taluk. The deceased Thava Mary had studied +2 and was working in an “Aids Centre” at Karaikudi where the accused came into contact with her. The accused was coming to the house of P.W. 3 and had contacts with the deceased Thava Mary. Three years before the occurrence, P.W.3 went to coolie work at 6.00 a.m. leaving her three daughters in the house. The accused came to the house of P.W. 3 on 26.5.1998 at 1.00 p.m. and during that time, P.W.4 was also in the house. P.W.3 returned at 5.00 p.m. and when she enquired about the deceased, Thava Mary, P.W.4 informed that the accused came from Karaikudi and took Thava Mary with Transfer Certificate by stating that he would secure the job for Thava Mary. P.W.1 Arumugasamy, Chokkanathaputhur Village Administrative Officer (V.A.O.), when he was in the office, one Village Assistant of Duraisamypuram of Melur, by name, Devamanickam, came and informed him that in the North of Devipattinam Road, Periyakulam Kanmai one dead body of a female was lying. P.W.1 Arumugasamy, Chokkanathaputhur Village Administrative Officer (V.A.O.), when he was in the office, one Village Assistant of Duraisamypuram of Melur, by name, Devamanickam, came and informed him that in the North of Devipattinam Road, Periyakulam Kanmai one dead body of a female was lying. P.W.1 along with the Village Assistant, Vedamanickam went to Devi-pattinam Road and found the dead body and saw the blood coming from the mouth and nose and the deceased was wearing saree M.O.1, jacket M.O. 2, skirt M.O.3, one pair chappal M.O.4, covering stud M.O.5, wrist watch M.O.6, silver bangle M.O.7, silver ring M.O. 8, bangle M.O.9, silver chain M.O.10, rexin bag M.O.11, Transfer Certificate Ex. P.1, Community Certificate Ex. P.2, Certificate issued by the Village Development Office for Sewing Machine training Ex. P.3, Inland letters written to the deceased Thava Mary Ex.P.4 (series). In the Community Certificate, it is mentioned as Thava Mary daughter of Manivel, Keerani Village, Devakottai Taluk. The deceased was working in Karaikudi “Aids Centre” and the accused was working in a tea shop. The accused and the deceased got acquaintance in the month of “Thai”. The deceased came to the house of P.W.7. She got injured on her leg when she tried to climb a compound wall while playing with the children of P.W.7. The accused and one Arumugam came to see the deceased Thava Mary. The accused gave money and Arumugam gave Horlicks. Thereafter, the accused came three times to the house of P.W.7 to see the deceased Thava Mary. When he came on the last occasion, Thava Mary was not in the house and had left to her place Keerani. The accused had taken P.W. 7s son Susairaj to the house of Thava Mary at Keerani. P.W.11 Karuppaiah, was residing at Devakottai. After work, when he was travelling in a bus proceeding to Thenkasi, P.W.11 Karuppaiah saw the deceased Thava Mary and the accused boarding the bus at 12.00 midnight, at Rajapalayam and getting down from the bus near Devipattinam vilakku at 1.30 a.m. He came to know about the death of Thava Mary from a news paper. He knows the deceased Thava Mary and that she belonged to Keerani village. 3. P.W.1 went to the Sethur police station at 12.45 noon and gave the complaint Ex. P5. He knows the deceased Thava Mary and that she belonged to Keerani village. 3. P.W.1 went to the Sethur police station at 12.45 noon and gave the complaint Ex. P5. P.W.14, the Sub-Inspector of Police on receiving the complaint registered a case in Crime No. 219 of 1998 under Sections 302, 404 and 364 of IPC. Ex.P.16 is the F.I.R. P.W.14 sent F.I.R. to the Court. P.W. 15, the Inspector of Police on receiving a copy of F.I.R. took up investigation and went to the scene of occurrence at Periakulam Kanmai at Devipattinam Road at 1.30 p.m. and prepared observation Mahazar Ex. P.6 and Rough Sketch Ex. P.7. He conducted inquest on the body of the deceased Thava Mary. The inquest report is Ex.P.18. He sent the body for Post-Mortem through the Head Constable P.W.13. P.W.5 Dr. Shanmugavel, at 8.00 a.m. on 28.5.1998 at Rajapalayam Government Hospital, on receiving the request Ex. P.8, conducted Post-Mortem on the body of the deceased and noted the following injuries: Appearances found at the post-mortem: A female distended dead body lies on back, symmetrical, tongue protruded, Eye balls protruded. Skin peeled off and collection of fluid beneath skin here and there with pressure impression mark on neck. Abdomen distended with gas. Stomach distended with gas, empty, heart congested, liver congested, spleen, kidney congested, intestines distended with gas, empty. Bladder empty-Uterus-6-7 months old dead male foetus present. The Doctor has opined that the death could have been caused 32 to 34 hours prior to the postmortem and that the deceased died of Asphyxia due to throttling. 4. P.W. 15 the Inspector of Police on continuing his investigation recovered blood stained mud M.O. 13, ordinary mud M.O. 14, handkerchief M.O. 15, M.O. 12, M.O. 16, and M.O. 11 and Exs. P1 to P3 and P4 (Series) in the presence of the witnesses. He examined the witnesses and recorded their statements. P.W.15 arrested the accused on 31.5.1998 at 10.00 p.m. near the Madurai Railway Station in the presence of the witnesses Ramar @ Adai Muthiah Ramar and Thangavel and recorded the statement of the accused. P.W. 15 recovered one pair of Silver Golusu M.O. 17 of the deceased Thava Mary from the accused under mahazar Ex. P.19. He filed final report on 10.8.1998. 5. When the accused was questioned under Section 313 of the Cr. P.W. 15 recovered one pair of Silver Golusu M.O. 17 of the deceased Thava Mary from the accused under mahazar Ex. P.19. He filed final report on 10.8.1998. 5. When the accused was questioned under Section 313 of the Cr. P.C. on the basis of the incriminating evidence against him, the accused denied the complicity of the offence and submitted that a false case has been foisted against him and prayed lesser punishment. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side). 7. The deceased Thava Mary as per the Post Mortem Ex.P.9, died of Asphyxia due to throttling. Therefore, her death was due to homicidal violence. 8. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that it is the case of circumstantial evidence. Under the circumstances, the materials relied on by the prosecution are not suggestive that the offence was committed by the accused and none else. The learned counsel further submitted that the motive for the offence has not been established on the prosecution side by referring to the evidence of PW.3 mother of the deceased and PW.4 the younger sister of the deceased, and it is submitted that they are interested witnesses. Then, it is argued that since as per their evidence the accused and the deceased had relationship from January to March, 1998, during which period, she had worked in “Aids Centre” in Devakottai and during which time, it is alleged that the accused was working in a tea shop, and in a gas agency at Devakottai and as per the Post Mortem Certificate, 6 to 7 months old dead male foetus was present; it could not have been because of the affairs the deceased had with the accused. It is then submitted that the deceased could have died 30 to 34 hours prior to the postmortem, which was conducted on 28.5.1998 at 8.00 a.m. in which case the death could have been at 10.00 p.m. on 27.5.1998 and therefore, the last seen theory of PW.11, that on 27.5.1998, when the bus, which was proceeding to Thenkasi, reached Rajapalayam at 12.00 in the night, the deceased and the accused got into the bus and got down at 1.30 a.m. near Devipattinam Road is unbelievable. It is further submitted that the silver Golusu MO.17 belonged to the deceased and said to have been recovered under Ex.P.19 from the accused, such recovery has not been proved since mahazar witnesses turned hostile not supporting the case of the prosecution. The learned counsel also argued that the Kaliappa in whose hospital, it is alleged that the accused had intercourse with the deceased as well the tea shop owner and gas agency owner where the accused had worked at Devakottai have not been examined. In support of such contentions, the learned counsel has relied on the decision of Dhananjay Shankar Shetty v. State of Maharashtra AIR 2002 SC 2787 : 2002 SCC (Cr.) 1444: 2002 (6) SCC 596 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held, “It is well settled that merely because motive is neither alleged nor proved, the same would ipso facto not affect the prosecution case but in case there are circumstances to create doubt regarding veracity of the prosecution case, this may…………….. material.” In Sadar Khan v. State of Karnataka (2004) 2 SCC 442 , the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held, “There cannot be any doubt whatsoever that with a view to satisfactorily prove the commission of a crime on the basis of circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must satisfy that: (1) the circumstances from which an inference of guilt is to be drawn must be cogently and firmly established; (2) the circumstances should have a tendency to unerringly point to the guilt of the accused; and (3) the circumstances taken cumulatively should form a chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probabilities the crime is committed by the accused and none else.” In Narendra Singh and another v. State of M.P. (2004) 10 SCC 699 , the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held “The entire case is based on circumstantial evidence. Pieces of circumstances, however strong may be, it is well known that all links in the chain must be proved.” 9. Heard the Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) and perused the entire materials. 10. As rightly submitted by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), there have been satisfactory and clinching evidence on the prosecution side with regard to the circumstantial evidence in finding the accused guilty of committing the murder of the deceased Thava Mary. Heard the Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) and perused the entire materials. 10. As rightly submitted by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), there have been satisfactory and clinching evidence on the prosecution side with regard to the circumstantial evidence in finding the accused guilty of committing the murder of the deceased Thava Mary. PW.3 mother and PW.4 sister of the deceased have clearly stated in their evidence with regard to the affairs the accused had with the deceased as early as from January to March 1998 and even before that. PW.7, who is the junior paternal aunt of the deceased also stated in the evidence that the deceased Thava Mary who studied upto +2 was in her house at Devakottai during which time, the deceased was working in an “Aids Centre” and the accused was working in a tea shop and both the accused and the deceased got acquaintance. Further, she has stated that in the month of “Thai”, the deceased came to the house where the deceased suffered an injury on her leg. The accused came with one Arumugam to see the deceased Thava Mary. The accused gave money to the deceased. The accused came three times to the house of PW.7 to see the deceased and even when Thava Mary had left to her mothers place at Keerani, the deceased came and took the son of PW-7 namely Susiaraj to that place. On the fateful day of occurrence i.e. on 26.5.1998, PW.3 mother of the deceased went out of the house leaving the deceased and her other two daughters in the house and when she came back in the evening she was informed by her daughter PW.4 that the accused came from Karaikudi and took the deceased Thava Mary with the Transfer Certificate by stating that he would secure a job for Thava Mary. PW.11, who knows the deceased Thava Mary, had seen the deceased in the company of the accused lastly when he was proceeding in a bus to Thenkasi and in the said bus, the accused along with the deceased boarded the bus at 12.00 mid night and both of them got down near Devipattinam vilakku at 1.30 a.m. 11. PW.11, who knows the deceased Thava Mary, had seen the deceased in the company of the accused lastly when he was proceeding in a bus to Thenkasi and in the said bus, the accused along with the deceased boarded the bus at 12.00 mid night and both of them got down near Devipattinam vilakku at 1.30 a.m. 11. Thus, the chain of the events have been proved by the prosecution viz., that the accused came to the house of PW.3 mother of the deceased; when PW.4 sister of the deceased was in the house and took the deceased along with the Transfer Certificate that he would secure a job in the house; PW.11 who knows the deceased and had seen her in the company of the accused when he was proceeding to Thenkasi in which bus the accused boarded along with the deceased at 12.00 mid night at Rajapalayam and both got down near Devipattinam Vilakku at 1.30 a.m., which is the place of occurrence; thereafter, the deceased was found to be dead; on information PW.1, V.A.O. of Chokkanathaputhur Village went and saw the body of the deceased; he found the Transfer Certificate Ex.P.1, Community Certificate Ex.P.2, Certificate issued by the Village Development Office for Sewing Machine Training Ex.P.3 and inland letters written to the deceased Ex.P.4 (Series) by her friend PW.12 and MOs. 1 to 11 have been recovered from the scene of occurrence under mahazar Ex.P.7, pursuant to the arrest of the accused on 31.5.1998 and the statement made by him Silver Golusu one pair M.O.7, which belonged to Thava Mary was recovered under Ex.P.29 by PW.15. 12. As far as the motive is concerned, PW.3 mother of the deceased has stated that one month prior to the death of the deceased, she knew that her daughter the deceased Thava Mary was pregnant and when enquired the deceased informed that the accused was the cause for the pregnancy and the accused used to come to her house. PW.4 also stated that the deceased was employed in an “Aids Centre” at Karaikudi. The deceased and the accused got acquaintance and they loved each other. PW.4 also identified the Golusu M.O.17 as belonged to the deceased. It was found in the uterus of the deceased Thava Mary a six to seven months old dead male foetus, after Post-Mortem, which was conducted on 28.5.1998. The deceased and the accused got acquaintance and they loved each other. PW.4 also identified the Golusu M.O.17 as belonged to the deceased. It was found in the uterus of the deceased Thava Mary a six to seven months old dead male foetus, after Post-Mortem, which was conducted on 28.5.1998. Inasmuch as both the accused and the deceased had acquaintance from January 1998, it is said that the accused could not have been responsible for causing the said pregnancy. However, it is in evidence that even before January 1998, the deceased had acquaintance with the accused. Under the said circumstances, the accused could have been responsible for the pregnancy of the deceased in respect of six to seven month old dead male foetus found in the uterus of the deceased. No doubt, the D.N.A. Test was not conducted. If conducted, it could have added more strength to the case of prosecution but that is only a flaw. Merely because PW.3 is mother, PW.4 is the sister and P.W.7 is the junior paternal aunt of the deceased, it cannot be said that their evidence is not trustworthy as interested witnesses in view of the fact that their evidence with regard to the affairs of the accused and the deceased have been clearly spoken to, which resulted in the pregnancy of the deceased. In the Post-Mortem Certificate, it is clearly stated that the deceased could have died 30 to 34 hours prior to the Post-Mortem; which was conducted on 28.5.1998 at 8.00 a.m. Therefore, the evidence of PW.7, who had seen the deceased in the company of the accused lastly and getting down from the bus in which he was travelling at 1.30 a.m. near Devipattinam Vilakku, which is the place of occurrence, is quite acceptable. The non-examination of the persons viz., the tea shop owner and gas agency owner, where the accused was employed and Kaliappa in which Hospital, it is alleged that the accused had intercourse with the deceased when the accused was working at Devakottai, is not fatal to the case of the prosecution. In their evidence, PW.7, PW.3 and PW.4 have spoken to the fact that the accused and the deceased had acquaintance, which later developed into love affairs between them. 13. In their evidence, PW.7, PW.3 and PW.4 have spoken to the fact that the accused and the deceased had acquaintance, which later developed into love affairs between them. 13. There is sufficient circumstantial evidence to indicate that for the purpose of murdering the deceased Thava Mary, the accused abducted her from the house of her mother PW.3 and committed the murder of the deceased and after committing such murder dishonestly misappropriated one Silver Golusu MO.17 belonged to the deceased and as such, the case has been proved and clearly established by the prosecution. In such circumstances, were are not inclined to differ from such findings of the Sessions Court that the accused is guilty for the said offences. 14. In the result, the Appeal is dismissed. The conviction and sentence imposed to the accused in S.C.No.148 of 2000 on the file of the Court of Principal Sessions Judge, Virudhunagar at Srivilliputhur are confirmed.