IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that circumstantial evidence and extrajudicial confessions can suffice for conviction when they form a complete chain pointing to the accused's guilt.

JUDGMENT :

(per the Hon’ble Sri Justice K.Sreenivasa Reddy)

This Criminal Appeal by the appellant-State is directed against the judgment, dated 04.07.2007 in Sessions Case No.76 of 2006 on the file of the II Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Srikakulam whereby the respondent/accused was found guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 304 Part-II and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘IPC’) and accordingly he was convicted of the said offences and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two years for the offence punishable under Section 304 Part-II IPC and to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of three months for the offence punishable under Section 201 IPC. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

2. The substance of the charges framed against the respondent/sole accused are that on 24.08.2005 in his house at Haridasupuram village, the accused did commit murder by intentionally causing death of his mother Smt.Sopeti Eeswaramma (hereinafter referred to, as ‘the deceased’) by way of electrocution with live electric wire, placing it around her neck and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 302 IPC; that on the same date, time and place mentioned above, he committed theft of gold ornaments present on the person of the deceased after killing her by electrocution with a dishonest intention and took them away and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 379 IPC; and that on the same day, time and place mentioned above, the accused having committed the offence of murder and theft, caused the evidence of those offences to disappear by burying the dead body of the deceased in the backyard of his house in order to screen himself being an offender from legal punishments for the said acts and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 201 IPC.

3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows.

P.W.2 is father of the accused. Basing on the statement of P.W.2, P.W.1-Panchayat Secretary of Haridasupuram lodged a report with police. Accused is youngest son of the deceased and P.W.2. He is an unemployee, married and blessed with two children. He ran a cloth business and incurred loss to a tune of Rs.60,000/-. His parents cleared some portion of his debts. Two months prior to the incident, wife and younger son of the accused went to his in-laws’ house. P.W.2 went to Parlakhemundi to look after his sister. The accused, his elder son and the deceased were in the house on 24.08.2005. In order to pledge gold ornaments of the deceased, the accused moved the matter before the deceased on 24.08.2005. But, the deceased did not agree therefor and abused the accused for his laziness. Having felt insulted and determined to secure the gold ornaments of the deceased with an evil intention, the accused decided to kill the deceased, secured a rubber glove from L.W.12- K.Rukmangadha Rao and small bundle of binding wire from his house, connected it to end of service wire and other end of the service wire to a switch board and placed it around neck of the deceased while she was cutting vegetables and killed her with electrocution. The accused removed gold ornaments present on the dead body and buried the same in the backyard of the house with an intention to screen evidence. Later, he pledged the gold ornaments for Rs.30,000/- with P.W.8 and clear his debts due to P.Ws.4 to 6 and others. On the next day, with the help of P.W.10, the accused dumped gravel at the backyard of the house and buried the dead body of the deceased. On 27.8.2005, he left the house, by handing over the keys of the house to P.W.7 and asked him to give the same to his father P.W.2 whenever he comes and stated that he was going to his father-in-law’s house to get back his family and returned home on 31.8.2005 with family. When family members asked him about the deceased, the accuse