Circumstantial evidence, including recovery of crucial items, must be coherent and consistently point to guilt to meet the burden of proof required for conviction in murder cases.

JUDGMENT :

Rajesh Rai K., J.

These three appeals by convicted accused Nos.1 to 3 are directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed in S.C.No.122/2015 dated 12.07.2017 by the Court of III Additional District and Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi, wherein the learned Sessions Judge has convicted the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 394 , 302 r/w Section 34 of IPC and consequently sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- each. In default of payment of fine, they shall suffer simple imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w Section 34 of IPC.

2. Since the accused sentenced for the major offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC for life, no separate sentence is imposed on them for the offence punishable under Section 394 of IPC.

3. Factual matrix of the prosecution case for consideration before the Sessions Court is that, on 24.10.2014 at about 10:00 a.m., PW.10-Gangaram espied three cadavers while he was passing through the road by the side of the house of deceased-Yallappa. Immediately, he had informed the same to PW.1-Pentappa (complainant) who is the nephew of (i.e., brother’s son) of deceased Yallappa that, on the intervening night of 23.10.2014 and 24.10.2014, some unknown miscreants had murdered his uncle Yallappa, his aunt Satyamma and their adopted son Bhojaraj by assaulting with wooden sticks on them.

4. On the basis of said information, PW.1 along with his relatives rushed to the house of the deceased- Yallappa and witnessed the dead bodies of Yallappa, Satyamma and their adopted son Bhojaraj laying in the pool of blood. Hence, PW.1 lodged the complaint before the respondent-Police on 24.10.2014 as per Ex.P1 and FIR has been registered in Crime No.150/2014 dated 24.10.2014 for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC against unknown persons by PW.21. Subsequently, the Investigation Officer i.e., PW.19 conducted further investigation. During the course of investigation, he obtained IMEI number of the mobile phone of deceased- Yallappa i.e., 911320650035520. On the basis of it, he tracked down the SIM used in the mobile of the deceased- Yellappa i.e., +91 8465015024 and gathered the information regarding the user details of the SIM. Upon receipt of the information’s afore narrated, PW.19 sent requisition to CW.20-Nodal Officer for issuing call details register. Thereafter, PW.20 obtained CDR and issued Customer Application Form pertaining to the said SIM. Accordingly, on 06.11.2014, PW.19 received customer application form and on verification, it is found that the mobile was transacted further to one CW.19-Gaibappa of Sangam Kalan village, Tandur Taluk, Rangareddy District, Andhra Pradesh. Hence, PW.19 along with PW.9 and CW.11 travelled to Andhra Pradesh to trace out the genesis of the crime and visited the house of CW.19- Gaibappa. On enquiry, CW.19 produced the mobile of deceased-Yallappa as per M.O.1 and the same was seized under Ex.P9-Mahazar on 14.11.2014 in the house of CW.19.

5. Thereafter, on enquiry, CW.19 informed PW.19 that the said mobile was sold to him by accused No.1- Srinivas and