JUDGMENT : S.NAGAMUTHU, J. The appellant is the sole accused in S.C.No.154 of 2010, on the file of the learned Principal District Special and Sessions Judge, Pudukkottai. He stood charged for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. By Judgment dated 07.03.2012, the Trial Court has convicted the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant has come up with this Criminal Appeal. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows:- The deceased, in this case, was one Mr.Adaikalasamy @ Chinnasamay. He was residing at Kodikkalpatti in Pudukkottai District. The accused also was residing in the same village. Both of them were agriculturists by profession. It is alleged that there were some disputes between the accused and the deceased for taking water to their respective lands for the purpose of irrigation. This is stated to be the motive for the occurrence. 2.1. While so, it is alleged that on 05.03.2010, the deceased and his wife [PW-1] had gone to their land for taking water from the Well. The accused also came there and questioned them. This resulted in a quarrel. The deceased attempted to switch off the motor. The accused prevented him from doing so. The deceased told the accused that for about one week, he did not take water from the Well and therefore, he would take water now. The accused told him that he would allow the deceased to take water only after his land was fully irrigated. This quarrel went on for a long time. 2.2. In culmination of the said quarrel, in the presence of PW-1, it is alleged that the accused cut the deceased. The deceased fell down. PW-1 rushed to the village and informed the relatives. When they returned, they found the deceased lying dead. In respect of the above occurrence, a complaint was made by PW-1 at 06.00 AM, on 05.03.2010, upon which a case in Crime No.55 of 2010, under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was registered by PW-11. EX-P1 is the complaint and EX-P14 is the First Information Report. When they returned, they found the deceased lying dead. In respect of the above occurrence, a complaint was made by PW-1 at 06.00 AM, on 05.03.2010, upon which a case in Crime No.55 of 2010, under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was registered by PW-11. EX-P1 is the complaint and EX-P14 is the First Information Report. Then, PW-11 forwarded both the documents to the Court, took up the case for investigation, proceeded to the place of occurrence, prepared an Observation Mahazer and a Rough Sketch, showing the place of occurrence in the presence of PW-3 and another witness. He recovered bloodstained earth and sample earth from the place of occurrence. He examined PW-1 and recorded her statement. He conducted inquest on the body of the deceased. EX-P16 is the inquest report. Then, he forwarded the dead body for postmortem. 2.3. PW-10 -Dr.Renugadevi conducted autopsy on the body of the deceased. He noticed the following injuries:- "1. An oblique chop wound, measuring 13cm X 3cm X bone deep, on the right side of forehead and face. 2. An oblique chop wound, measuring 3cm X 1cm X bone deep, on the right side of the forehead. 3. A transverse chop wound, measuring 25cm X 8cm X exposing the underlying structures on the right side of face, chin, left side of face. Cut fracture of lower jaw bone present. 4. A transverse chop wound, measuring 3cm X 1cm X cavity deep, on the front of centre of the neck. The muscles, blood vessels and nerves are cut. Cut fracture of wind pipe, food pipe and hyoid bond present. 5. A vertical chop wound, measuring 4cm X 1cm X cavity deep, on the front of right side of neck. 6. A vertical chop wound measuring 11cm X 1cm X bone deep, on the centre of the face. Cut fracture of nasal bones, upper jaw bone present. 7. A vertical chop wound, measuring 16cm X 2cm X bone deep, on the left side of face. 8. An oblique chop wound measuring 4cm X 1cm X through and through on the pinna of left ear. 9. An oblique chop wound, measuring 9cm X 6cm X bone deep, on the front of right side of chest. Cut fracture of right collar bone and 1st rib right side present. 10. 8. An oblique chop wound measuring 4cm X 1cm X through and through on the pinna of left ear. 9. An oblique chop wound, measuring 9cm X 6cm X bone deep, on the front of right side of chest. Cut fracture of right collar bone and 1st rib right side present. 10. An oblique chop wound, measuring 6cm X 2cm X tendon deep, on the back of left ankle. 11. A transverse chop wound, measuring 6cm X 1cm X muscle deep, on the inner aspect of middle of left leg. 12. An oblique chop wound, measuring 14cm X 6cm X bone deep, on the left side of occipital region of the scalp. 13. A vertical chop wound, measuring 15cm X 3cm X bone deep, on the back of left wrist and hand. Cut fracture of lower end of ulna bone, 4th and 4th meta carpal bones present. 14. A transverse chop wound, measuring 5cm X 2cm X muscle deep, on the front of left arm. The edges of all the above wounds are irregular. Blood is diffused into the wound track of all the wounds. He gave opinion that the deceased would appear to have died of shock and hemorrhage due to multiple injuries". EX-P13 is the postmortem certificate. He gave opinion that the deceased would appear to have died of shock and hemorrhage due to multiple wounds. 2.4. PW-11 continued the investigation and arrested the accused, on 06.03.2010, at 07.00 AM, in the presence of PW-5 and another witness. On such arrest, the accused gave a voluntary confession, in which he disclosed the place, where he had hidden MO-1, the aruval, which was recovered under a mahazer. Then, he forwarded the accused to the Court for judicial remand. He made a request to the Court to forward the material objects for chemical examination. The report revealed that there was human blood on all the material objects, including the aruval. On completing the investigation, he laid charge sheet against the accused. 2.5. Based on the above materials, the Trial Court framed appropriate charges, as detailed in the first paragraph of this Judgment. When the accused was questioned in respect of the charges, he pleaded innocence. In order to prove the charges, on the side of the prosecution, 11 witnesses were examined, 18 documents and ten material objects were marked. 2.6. 2.5. Based on the above materials, the Trial Court framed appropriate charges, as detailed in the first paragraph of this Judgment. When the accused was questioned in respect of the charges, he pleaded innocence. In order to prove the charges, on the side of the prosecution, 11 witnesses were examined, 18 documents and ten material objects were marked. 2.6. Out of the said 11 witnesses, PW-1 is the sole eye witness to the occurrence. PW-2 has turned hostile and he has not supported the case of the prosecution in any manner. PW-3 has spoken about the preparation of the observation mahazer and the rough sketch and the recovery of the material objects from the place of occurrence. PW-4 has spoken about the confession given by the accused and the consequential recovery of aruval. PW-5 has turned hostile and he has not supported the case of the prosecution in any manner. PW-6 has spoken about the chemical examination conducted by her. She has stated that there were bloodstains found on all the material objects. PW-7 is the Head Clerk of the Court, who has stated about the forwarding of the material objects to the Court for chemical examination. PW-8 is the Constable, who has stated that he carried the dead body to the hospital for postmortem. PW-9 is yet another Constable, who has stated that he forwarded the material objects to the Forensic Lab, as directed by the learned Judicial Magistrate. PW-10 has spoken about the autopsy conducted by her and her final opinion regarding the cause of death. PW-11 has spoken about the investigation conducted by him and the filing of the final report. 2.7. When the Trial Court examined the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in respect of the incriminating evidences available against him, he denied the same as false. However, he did not choose to examine any witness nor to exhibit any document. Having considered all the above materials, the Trial Court convicted the appellant, as detailed in the first paragraph of this Judgment and punished him accordingly. That is how, the appellant is now before this Court with this Criminal Appeal. 3. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent and also perused the records carefully. 4. In this case, the prosecution relies only on the eye-witness account of PW-1. That is how, the appellant is now before this Court with this Criminal Appeal. 3. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent and also perused the records carefully. 4. In this case, the prosecution relies only on the eye-witness account of PW-1. The occurrence had taken place at 03.00 AM, in the field, where there was nobody else available to witness the occurrence. Admittedly, it was so dark at the place of occurrence and there was no light available. PW-1, though in chief-examination has stated that she saw the accused cutting the deceased, during cross-examination, she has stated that only on hearing the alarm raised by the deceased, she rushed to the place of occurrence and at that time, she found five to six persons running away from the place of occurrence. She has further stated that when she reached the place of occurrence, a number of persons, who cut the deceased, had already run away from the scene of occurrence. She has further stated that they had left behind a number of weapons used for cutting the deceased. During cross-examination, PW-1 has further stated that when she was at the place of occurrence, the police officials came and recovered all such weapons found at the place of occurrence. 5. From the evidence of PW-1, it is crystal clear that the deceased would have been done to death by many persons and PW-1 had not seen the actual occurrence. She has further stated that on the spot, police came and obtained her signature in a blank paper and she did not say anything about the occurrence to the police. This solitary evidence of PW-1 is highly self-contradictory and the same cannot be believed. Except the evidence of PW-1, there is no other evidence available against the accused. In such view of the matter, we hold that the prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubts and therefore, the accused is entitled for acquittal. 6. In the result, this Criminal Appeal is allowed; the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant by Judgment dated 07.03.2012, made in S.C.No.154 of 2010, on the file of the learned Principal District and Special Sessions Judge, Pudukkottai, is set aside and the appellant is acquitted. Fine amount, if any, paid by the appellant shall be refunded to him. 6. In the result, this Criminal Appeal is allowed; the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant by Judgment dated 07.03.2012, made in S.C.No.154 of 2010, on the file of the learned Principal District and Special Sessions Judge, Pudukkottai, is set aside and the appellant is acquitted. Fine amount, if any, paid by the appellant shall be refunded to him. Bail bond executed by the appellant and the sureties shall stand terminated.