Supreme Court of India
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE ARIJIT PASAYAT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA
M.A. Antony @ Antappan
Versus
State of Kerala
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.811 OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.5624 of 2006)
Decided on : 22-04-2009
(1997) 10 SCC 44 - Relied upon.
AIR 1964 SC 358 - Referred to.
Judgment :
Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Kerala High Court upholding the conviction of the appellant for offences punishable under Sections 449, 379, 380, 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the `IPC). Appellant was sentenced to death for the offence relatable to Section 302 IPC, life imprisonment, 7 years imprisonment, 7 years imprisonment for the offence relatable to Section 449, 380 and 201 respectively. No separate sentence was imposed for the offence relatable to Section 379 IPC. For confirmation of the death sentence reference was made to the High Court under Section 366 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short the `Code). The appellant also preferred an appeal and by the impugned judgment, both the Death Reference and Criminal Appeal were disposed of.
3. The accusations in essence against the appellant are as follows:
On the intervening night of 6th and 7th January, 2001, when inmates of Aluva Municipal Town of Ernakulam District in the State of Kerala were in deep sleep, Manjooran House located in the midst of the town became a scene of ghastly crime. Six members of one family in the Manjooran House lost their lives in a matter of three hours, Antony @ Antappan, the appellant herein, in search of greener pastures abroad for which purpose he needed money but was refused to be paid by the members of the Manjooran family, and therefore as per the prosecutions version used knife, axe, amd electrocuted and strangulated Kochurani and Clara at about 10 in the night.of 6.1.2001 and Augustine, his wife Mary, and their children – Divya and Jesmon at midnight. The Manjooran House full of life at 10 in the night by the stroke of midnight became a graveyard. The appellant after causing the death of Kochurani and Clara is said to have waited for the arrival of other four members of the family who had gone to see a film show. On their arrival he turned them into corpses. He waited for their arrival to kill them as he knew that for the two murders committed earlier by him he would be suspected by them, as he was in the house when they left the house for the film show. The prosecution alleges that all these murders were cold blooded, planned and executed with precision and the appellant ensured that there is no trace of life left in them before he left the scene of occurrence.
When put to trial for murders, appellant, however, pleaded innocence and claimed trial.
4. The trial Court as noted above found the accused guilty.
5. Law was set into motion in the following manner:
Joseph @ Rajan on 7.1.2001 at 11.30 p.m. gave information to the Aluva Police Station of Ernakulam District that his sister, brother-in-law and their children were murdered by someone at sometime between 6 p.m. on 6.1.2001 and 10 p.m. on 7.1.2001 within Manjooran House, where his brother-in-law Augustine @ Baby, sister Mary @ Baby, children Divyamol and Jesmon, brother-in-laws sister Rani (Kochurani) and mother Rahel were living as a family. He requested for action in the matter. In the first information, Ext.P1, got recorded by N.V. John, Sub Inspector of Police. The informant Joseph stated that he had come to inform that someone had killed his sister-Mary, brother in law-Augustine and their children-Divyamol and Jesmon in their residence at Aluva. He belongs to Christian community and is residing with his father, mother, wife and children. It was stated by him that he was running a stationery store there and his sister Mary was married to Augustine of Manjooran House. His brother in law was running a hardware shop at Aluva. Both the children were school going. On 6.1.2001, his sister had come home to take his father who was sick to the hospital. His sister told him that she would come on 7.1.2001 by 9.30 a.m. to stay with them, as his wife was going to her house. On Saturday morning his wife went to her home. At that time, his sister Lizy, was in the ho
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.