In criminal cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must provide a complete and unbroken chain of evidence that conclusively points to the guilt of the accused, failing which the accused is entitled to the benefit of doubt.

JUDGMENT

K.SOMASHEKAR, J. -

This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 27/3/2017 rendered by the Court of the III Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, sitting at Anekal in S.C.No.53/2010 for offences punishable under Ss. 302 and 201 of the IPC. For the offence under Sec. 302 of the IPC, each of the appellants / Accused Nos.1 to 7 were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.20, 000.00 each and in default of payment of fine, they were to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year; further, for the offence punishable under Sec. 201 IPC, they were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.15, 000.00 each and in default of payment of fine, each of them were to undergo simple imprisonment for nine months. Both the sentences were to run concurrently.

2. The appellants / Accused Nos.1 to 7 have preferred the present appeal seeking to allow the appeal and to thereby acquit the appellants / accused for offences under Ss. 302 and 201 of the IPC, having regard to the grounds urged therein.

3. Heard the learned counsel Shri Prasanna Kumar P for the appellants / accused and the learned HCGP Shri Krishna Kumar K.K. for the respondent / State. Perused the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence rendered by the Trial Court in S.C.No.53/2010 consisting of the evidence of PW-1 to PW-22, the documents at Exhibits P1 to P27 on behalf of the prosecution, the documents at Exhibits D1 to D4 on behalf of the accused and the material objects marked at MO-1 to MO-15.

4. The factual matrix of this appeal is as under: It transpires from the case of the prosecution that Accused No.1 / Mallikarjuna @ Balaji @ Chinna @ Arjun had borrowed a sum of Rs.8, 00, 000.00 (Rupees Eight Lakhs only) from the deceased Sridhar. It is said that the deceased Sridhar was frequently demanding Accused No.1 to repay the said borrowed amount. In that regard, an enmity had developed in between the deceased and accused persons. Therefore, it is said that Accused No.1 had hatched a criminal conspiracy with Accused Nos.2 to 7 to commit the murder of the said Sridhar. Accordingly, as on 10/2/2010 in between 11.58 a.m. and 1.00 p.m., the accused persons had committed the murder of the deceased Sridhar and in order to screen themselves from legal punishment, tried to have burnt the dead body of Sridhar. However, the body remained half burnt. In pursuance of the act of the accused, on the filing of a complaint by the complainant namely CW-2 cited as a witness in the charge-sheet as per Exhibit P8, criminal law was set into motion by recording an FIR as per Exhibit P18. But another complaint is also got marked at Exhibit P17 and one more FIR was also said to be recorded as per Exhibit P21. Subsequent to recording the FIR and setting the criminal law into motion, the Investigating Officer has taken up the case for investigation and during investigation, he recorded the voluntary statement of Accused No.1 as per Exhibit P22 and voluntary statement of Accused No.4 as per Exhibit P23, voluntary statement of Accused No.3 as per Exhibit P24, voluntary statement of Accused Nos.5, 6 and 7 as per Exhibit P25, as per Exhibit P26 and as per Exhibit P27 and based upon their voluntary statements, the Investigating Officer had proceeded with the investigation of the case by conducting several mahazars such as Exhibits P1, P2, P3, P4, P5, P6, P9, P11, P12, P13, P14 and P19, all of them being panchanamas. These are the mahazars said to have been drawn by the Investigating Officer in the presence of panch witnesses who were secured such as PW-1, PW-2, PW-4, PW-5, PW-12, PW-3, PW-6, PW14, PW-7, PW-13, PW-11, PW-15, PW-22 and PW-21. They are the witnesses secured by the Investigating Officer and in their presence the aforesaid several panchanamas have been drawn by the Investigating Officer and so also the Statement of witnesses were recorde