V.K. Bali, C.J.

A school going girl aged 13 years, daughter of Poovanchery Thekkeveettil Sankara Narayanan alias Kutty (A1) was raped and murdered by Ahmmed Koya. After this heinous crime when the deceased somehow obtained bail, A1 in conspiracy with Thazhethethil Animon alias Ani Mohan and Mancheriyil Sankarnarayanan, A2 and A3 respectively, is said to have committed his murder. The prosecution in the trial held against the appellants named above was able to secure conviction of A1 on the basis of circumstantial evidence consisting of strong motive that actuated him to commit the crime as also recovery of the crime gum. He was thus held guilty for offence under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-. He was also sentenced to undergo imprisonment for 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default to undergo imprisonment for three months under section 201 IPC. He was further sentenced to undergo imprisonment for one year under section 3(a) of the Arms Act and the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. His co-accused A2 and A3 were, however, acquitted of the charges under section 302 IPC but convicted under section 201 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- each and in default of payment of fine they were to undergo imprisonment for six months each. The order of conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.1 (Ad Hoc) Manjeri dated 20th October, 2005 has been challenged by the appellants in this criminal appeal.

2. Like in other cases based upon circumstantial evidence, so also in this, the pertinent point that needs consideration is as to whether the circumstances led by the prosecution unmistakably point towards the guilt of the appellants and all the circumstances are such that no other conclusion, but for the appellants being guilty is possible. The facts leading to the question posed above need a necessary mention.

3. The occurrence leading to death of Ahammed Koya, it appears, as per the prosecutions story, had taken place somewhere in the midnight on 27.6.2002. The F.I.R. with regard to the occurrence was however lodged on 4.7.2002 by the brother of the deceased, P.W.1 Abdul Azeez. In the F.I. Statement Ext.P1 brother of the deceased stated that he was a Madrassa Teacher and was doing his duties at Edakkara Thannikkadavu. He was residing along with his family at Cheruvannur in Charankavu in elangoor amsom and desom. He had come to the police station to lodge a complaint that his younger brother Mohammed Koya had been missing from the area. It was after 8 p.m. on 27.6.2002 that he happened to be missing from the locally. He was an accused in the Krishna Priya murder case. He further stated that it was nearly six months since he got released on bail. After getting released on bail he did not come to the house. He was residing somewhere in the nearby area. He should be aged about 24 years. On the day he was missing, he was wearing black pants and dark black shirt. He stated that he was making a complaint about his brother being missing. This report was recorded by C. Sankaran, Head Constable on 4.7.2002. During the course of trial the prosecution examined Dr. Shirly Vasu, P.W.15, who stated that she was working as professor in Forensic Department at Medical College Hospital, Calicut and had conducted autopsy on the body of Mohammed Koya, 24 years and she issued the certificate Ext.P10. The cause of death was due to shot gun injuries sustained in the chest and abdomen. The doctor noted the following ante mortem injuries on the dead body of Mohammed Koya:

"1. Three lacerated puncture holes, the uppermost one 0.7 cm round 1 cm below the right collarbone and 10 cm to the right of front midline, the next one 0.7 cm in diameter 1.5 cm below and 0.4 cm to the right of the previous one and the third one 1.2 cm in diametere 5 cm