SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(SC) 992

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ABHAY S. OKA, AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, JJ.
Karakkattu Muhammed Basheer – Appellant
Versus
The State of Kerala – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 291 of 2023
Decided On : 05-11-2024

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Thomas P. Joseph, Sr. Adv. Mr. Tom Joseph, AOR Dr. Linto K.B.,Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Harshad V. Hameed, AOR Mr. Dileep Poolakkot, Adv. Mrs. Ashly Harshad, Adv.

The prosecution must establish a complete and unbroken chain of circumstantial evidence to secure a conviction, with any reasonable doubt favoring the accused.

Headnote:

Circumstantial Evidence - Murder - IPC Sections 302, 201 - The court emphasized the necessity of an unbroken chain of circumstantial evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, highlighting the principles governing such cases and ultimately finding the prosecution's evidence insufficient.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant was convicted for the murder of Gouri based on circumstantial evidence, with no eyewitnesses. The prosecution alleged a motive stemming from an illicit relationship between the appellant and another accused, leading to Gouri's death.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the prosecution failed to establish a complete chain of circumstantial evidence linking the appellant to the crime, leading to reasonable doubt regarding his guilt.

Issues: Whether the prosecution established the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt based on circumstantial evidence.

Ratio Decidendi: The court reiterated that in cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must prove a complete chain of events leading to the only conclusion of guilt, with any doubt benefiting the accused.

Result: The appeal is allowed, and the appellant is acquitted of all charges.

JUDGMENT

AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J.

1. This Appeal is preferred against the judgment and order dated 18.10.1996 passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam (hereinafter referred to as “the impugned judgment”), upholding the order of conviction and sentence passed by the Sessions Court, of the Appellant/Accused No. 01 under Sections 302 and 201 of IPC for the murder of one Gouri during the night of 16th-17th August 1989, at the house of Accused No. 02. The sentence included life imprisonment under Section 302 and seven years of rigorous imprisonment under Section 201 of IPC. The Accused No. 02 was found guilty under Section 201 of IPC receiving a sentence of four year rigorous imprisonment. Against the order of conviction and sentence, two separate appeals were preferred by the Appellant-Accused No. 01 and Accused No. 02. These appeals came to be dismissed by the impugned judgment, upholding the conviction and sentence of both the accused/appellants therein. However, the present Appeal is preferred by Accused No. 01 only.

2. The story as made out by the prosecution is that the body of a woman was discovered in a paddy field by PW1-V.T. Manikandan, while he was going for work in the morning of 17.08.1989. He informed the police, and based on his statement, PW38-C.P. Vijayamani, a Sub Inspector, registered a case of unnatural death at the Parappanangadi Police Station. This witness visited the scene, took photographs, and collected fingerprints. The postmortem examination was conducted by PW33- Dr. M. Kunjukrishnan, on 18.08.1989, at 10:30 AM. He reported finding six antemortem injuries on the left side of the head fractured into multiple fragments, as well as abraded contusions on the right wrist and left knee. Injuries on the head were determined to be sufficient to cause death under ordinary circumstances and could have been inflicted with a weapon such as a coconut scraper (MO-20). According to the medical expert, the time of occurrence of death was approximately 30 to 35 hours before the postmortem examination. PW2-V.T Lakshmi and PW3-V.T Ambika, mother and sister of deceased with some local people identified the dead body of Gouri. The case was investigated by PW39-K.V Satheesan, who submitted the final report against the Appellant and Accused No. 02.

3. To prove the guilt of the accused, prosecution proceeded to establish motive for the murder by asserting that there was illicit relationship between the Appellant and Accused No. 02. This relationship had developed for the reason that the husband of Accused No. 02 was living abroad, leaving her to reside alone with her two children, which lead to the two accused coming close. The deceased, Gouri, was related to Accused No. 02 and since this accused was living alone, the deceased would frequently visit her house and even stayed there overnight.

4. When the relationship between the Appellant and Accused No. 02 was discovered and local opposition increased, the Appellant at the suggestion of Accused No. 02, entered into a registered marriage with Gouri on 17.05.1989, in an attempt to cover up his relationship with Accused No. 02. It is also brought on record, that the said marriage was dissolved by way of another deed dated 31.07.1989. It was alleged that there were letters which were exchanged between the two accused indicating their intimacy and love for one another, albeit under assumed names. However, there was no evidence which was brought on record especially the factum that these letters were indeed written by these two accused in the form of some handwriting expert etc.

5. The narrative put forward by the prosecution is that on the date of incident both the accused and deceased Gouri were at the house of Accused No. 02. An altercation occurred between the Appellant and the deceased with reference to Appellant’s relationship with Accused No. 02. It is alleged that during this confrontation, Appellant grabbed a coconut scrapper from the kitchen and hit Gouri on the head mu

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top