JUDGMENT : P. DEVADASS, J. The sole accused in the Sessions Case in S.C. No. 176 of 2011 on the file of learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Coimbatore, challenges his conviction and sentence. 2. The learned Sessions Judge convicted him under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentenced him to life with a fine of Rs.1000/-i/d 3 months R.I. 3. The case of the prosecution, briefly runs as under: (i) The deceased and the accused were friends. The accused received money from P.W.1/wife of the deceased for evicting tenants from the house of the aunt of the deceased residing in Karumathampatti. As the accused has neither completed the work nor repaid the amount, dispute arose between both sides. (ii) In the circumstances, on 07.02.2009, at about 8.45p.m., the deceased came to his house, bare bodied. When P.W.1, questioned him, the deceased told her that, near "Keerthi Stores", near Chinniyapalayam Bus Stand, when he demanded money from the accused, he manhandled him, his shirt was torn and thrown in front of the shop. After sometime, the deceased told P.W.1 that he would go and get back his shirt. P.W.1 tried to stop him, but did not succeed. P.W.1 followed him. (iii) When the deceased reached the road, which leads to Irugur, the accused, who was waiting there, cut the deceased with M.O.1, billhook. The deceased bled profusely and died on the spot. P.W.1 witnessed the occurrence. P.W.s 2 and 3, hearing the cries of P.W.1, came to the scene place. (iv) On 8.2.2009, 11.45 p.m. At B-6 Peelamedu Police Station, P.W.1 lodged Ex.P1 complaint to P.W.18 Inspector. He registered this case for an offence under Section 302 I.P.C (Ex.P19 F.I.R.) sent the Express F.I.R. to Court. He took up his investigation. Visited the scene place. Prepared Ex.P2 Observation Mahazar in the presence of P.W.4 and another person. Drew Ex.P20 Rough Sketch of the scene place. He recorded the statement of P.W.1 and other material witnesses. In the presence of Panchayatdars, he held inquest over the dead body of the deceased (Inquest report Ex-P21). He sent the dead body to the hospital for postmortem (Ex.P11). (v) P.W.13, performed autopsy on the dead body and noted the following injuries: (1) Reddish contusion noted in the front of neck 15x9-5x3-2 cm. On dissection, bruising noted in the soft tissues in the superficial and deep planes of neck. He sent the dead body to the hospital for postmortem (Ex.P11). (v) P.W.13, performed autopsy on the dead body and noted the following injuries: (1) Reddish contusion noted in the front of neck 15x9-5x3-2 cm. On dissection, bruising noted in the soft tissues in the superficial and deep planes of neck. (2) A vertically oblique cut injury measuring 9x1.5-1cm starting just inner to inner canthus of right eye in the root of nose and left cheek regions with tapering in the lower end for 0.5 cm which is located 1cm left to left alae nasi. The wound has passed obliquely inwards and downwards cutting the unerlying nasal and maxillary bones in the line of the wound to a maximum depth of 5 cm. The margins of the wound is lacerated. (3) A oblique cut injury with mildly serrated margins measuring 10x5-4x1 cms muscle deep, seen starting from lower border of left lower jaw, 2 cms inner to angle and seen extending to right and ending 1cms below middle of ramus of right side lower jaw bone. (4) A subcutaneous deep cut injury seen 1 cm below and parallel to the middle of wound No.3 measuring 5 x 0.5 cm. (5) Reddish abrasions seen in the following regions: -Multiple intermittent scratch abrasions seen over front of neck of sizes varying from 15x0.25 cm to 10x0.25 cm totally 10 in number and the midportion of the upper 5 scratch abrasions found merging with the lower part of the wound no.3. -Multiple vertical scratch abrasions seen over right scapular region of sizes varying from 7 x 0.5 cm to 5 x 0.5 cm over an area of 15.5 cm. -Horizontally over top of right shoulder 5 x 0.5 cm & 2x1 cm and over front of right shoulder 6 x 1 cm. -Vertically oblique below the middle of right clavicle 4 x 0.5 cm and another abrasion 6 x 0.5 cm seen inner to previous abrasion. -Vertically oblique over inner end of right clavicle and adjoining neck 6 x 0.5 cm. -Outer aspect of left shoulder 6 x 0.5 cm -Outer to right eye 4x1 cm. (6) Left upper central incisor found dislodged from its blood filled socket. Right central incisor found partially cut. (vi) P.W.13 opined that the deceased would appear to have died due to combined effect of VIOLENT COMPRESSION over neck and SHOCK due to OTHER INJURIES sustained by him. (6) Left upper central incisor found dislodged from its blood filled socket. Right central incisor found partially cut. (vi) P.W.13 opined that the deceased would appear to have died due to combined effect of VIOLENT COMPRESSION over neck and SHOCK due to OTHER INJURIES sustained by him. (Ex.P12 Post Mortem Certificate). (vii) In the presence of P.W.4 and another person, from the scene place, P.W.8 recovered bloodstained earth (M.O.5), sample earth (M.O.6), a pair of slippers (M.O.7), torn shirt of the deceased (M.O.4) under Mahazar. He examined witnesses and recorded their statement. On 8.2.2009, near the TASMAC Bar, near N.G.B. College, in the presence of P.W.5 and another person, P.W.18 had arrested the accused and recorded his confessional statement Ex.P5. Based on that, at the instance of the accused, he seized a Motorbike (M.O.8) under Ex.P6 Mahazar. He also seized M.O.1 Bill book from a bush near Mylampatti road, Ash (M.O.9), Bottle (M.O.10) under Ex.P7 Mahazar. He examined further witnesses. He sent the accused for judicial custody and the case-properties for being sent to lab for chemical analysis. (viii) After P.W.18, P.W.19 continued the investigation. Concluding his investigation, P.W.19 filed the final report before the Committal Court. 4 The learned Magistrate committed the case to the Court of Sessions, Coimbatore. 5. The learned Sessions Judge, on perusing the case records and on considering the submissions of both sides, framed a charged under Section 302 I.P.C. as against the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge. 6. The prosecution examined P.W.s 1 to 19, marked Exs-P1 to P21 and exhibited M.Os 1 to 10. 7. When the accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. on the incriminating information in the prosecution evidence, he denied the offence. He did not examine any witness nor mark any document on his side. 8. Appreciating the evidence adduced and the submissions of both sides, the Trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused, as already stated. 9. The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the evidence of star witness, P.W.1, actually, did not illuminate the prosecution version of the case. He would further submit that the evidence of P.W.13, reveals that on dissection of the dead body of the deceased, it was found that the deceased had taken alcohol. P.W.13 also pointed out that the deceased was strangulated and thereafter only, the cut injuries were inflicted upon him. He would further submit that the evidence of P.W.13, reveals that on dissection of the dead body of the deceased, it was found that the deceased had taken alcohol. P.W.13 also pointed out that the deceased was strangulated and thereafter only, the cut injuries were inflicted upon him. However, P.W.1, in her cross-examination, completely denied that her husband was drunk at the time of occurrence. The learned counsel would also submit that it is quite strange that the accused was waiting to unleash the assault on the deceased. 10. The learned counsel for the appellant would doubt the very presence of P.W.1 at the scene of occurrence and in the circumstances, she does not inspire confidence in her. It is quite unsafe to act upon such a testimony of P.W.1 and visit the accused with penal consequences. 11. The learned counsel further submitted that the evidence of P.W.13, Postmortem Doctor, completely discredits the testimony of P.W.1. Thus, he would submit that the prosecution has not established its case beyond all reasonable doubts. 12. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that already there was rift between the deceased and the accused. This aspect has been spoken to by the witness. P.W.1 is none other than the wife of the deceased. In her evidence, she has detailed as to why and how it became necessary for her to be present at the scene of crime. In her evidence, P.W.1 has clearly deposed that she had witnessed the occurrence. Her evidence itself is enough to sustain the charge under Section 302 I.P.C. In the circumstances, the Trial Court has rightly convicted and appropriately sentenced the accused. 13. We have given our anxious consideration to the submissions of both sides, and perused the judgment of the Trial Court and the entire materials on record. 14. The question is whether the charge under Section 302 I.P.C. as against the accused has been proved by the prosecution beyond all reasonable doubts. 15. The main witness in this case is P.W.1. She is the wife of the deceased. She has been projected as an ocular witness to the occurrence. 16. Already, bad blood was brewing between the deceased and the accused in connection with the accused neither performing the obligation of evicting the tenants from the house of the relative of the deceased nor returning the money paid to him. She is the wife of the deceased. She has been projected as an ocular witness to the occurrence. 16. Already, bad blood was brewing between the deceased and the accused in connection with the accused neither performing the obligation of evicting the tenants from the house of the relative of the deceased nor returning the money paid to him. On the fateful day, prior to the occurrence proper, there was scuffle between the deceased and the accused in connection with this money issue. The accused is said to have committed excess and manhandled the deceased. Shortly thereafter, the deceased came to his house and unravelled the said incident to P.W.1. Thereafter, the alleged occurrence stated to have been taken place. 17. According to P.W.1, she had witnessed the entire occurrence. In her chief examination, she has revealed the occurence beginning to the end. 18. P.W.13 performed autopsy on the dead body of the deceased. P.W.13 has stated that the deceased was found drunk. To the defence question, P.W.13 had answered that there are indications that the deceased having been strangulated first and the mortal wounds were inflicted thereafter. Nowhere in her evidence, P.W.1 would say that prior to the occurrence, her husband was strangulated by the accused. Further, she did not say, during her cross-examination, that at or about the time, her deceased husband was drunk. 19. Moreover, it is quite strange and against common sense to believe the prosecution version of the occurrence and narration of events that the accused, was waiting for the accused at the place of occurrence, with a weapon in his hand, when especially, the deceased, after the scuffle, left the place to his house. This goes to shake the credibility of P.W.1. Thus, it is seen that the very presence of P.W.1, at the place of occurrence and that she had witnessed the occurrence is highly doubtful. 20 The testimony of P.W.1 is the main testimony in this case. The main hope of the prosecution is P.W.1 herself. When evidence of P.W.1 goes, necessarily, the charge has to go. The prosecution has miserably failed to establish the charge against the accused to the hilt. 21. In view of the fore goings, this criminal appeal succeeds. 20 The testimony of P.W.1 is the main testimony in this case. The main hope of the prosecution is P.W.1 herself. When evidence of P.W.1 goes, necessarily, the charge has to go. The prosecution has miserably failed to establish the charge against the accused to the hilt. 21. In view of the fore goings, this criminal appeal succeeds. The conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant under Section 302 I.P.C. in S.C. No. 176/2011 on the file of the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Coimbatore are set aside. The appellant is acquitted. The appellant shall be released forthwith, if his further custody is no longer required in connection with any other case. Fine amount, if already paid, shall be refunded to him.