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

2005 Supreme(Ker) 543

Judges : K.PADMANABHAN NAIR,V.RAMKUMAR
Saidu Mohammed - Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala, Represented by the Public Prosecutor - Respondent
Case No : Crl. Appeal Nos.1207 of 2004, 1544 of 2004, 1083 of 2005 and Crl.R.P.No.2373 of 2004
Decided On : 09/05/2005
Advocates Appeared :
For the Appellants : G. Janardhana Kurup, Senior Advocate, P. Vijaya Bhanu, P.M. Rafiq, P.D. Baby John, T.C. Sowmiavathy, Hrithwik, Advocates. For the Respondents: N. Bhaskaran Nair, Public Prosecutor.

Headnote:

Indian Evidence Act 1872 - Section 27 - Statement - Signature or thump impression - Conviction - Unlawful Assembly - Held, Reading of S.27 shows that the above provision is an exception to Ss. 25 and 26 of the Evidence Act and what is made relevant is the fact deposed to as discovered in consequence of information received from a person accused of an offence - What is material is the discovery of the fact and not the recovery of the material object - Recovery in pursuance of the disclosure made by one accused cannot be used against a co-accused - When the authorship of concealment is properly proved, the statement is admissible under S.27 of the Evidence Act - It is not necessary that the object must continue to remain in the place where it was stated to have been placed - Mere fact that there is some delay in disclosing the name of the first accused is not fatal - Omission of the trial Judge to impose sentence after finding the appellant guilty of the offences under Ss.143, 147 and 341 is illegal - Conviction of an accused without sentence is illegal - Mere presence in the unlawful assembly may fasten vicariously criminal liability under S.143 I.P.C - Mere fact that he did not inform the relatives of the deceased that he had witnessed such a ghastly incident is not a ground to reject his evidence - Delayed questioning of witness alone is not a ground to reject his evidence - Witnesses had specifically stated that the identity of the assailants were known to them long prior to the date of incident, it is net at all necessary to conduct a Test Identification Parade and the failure to conduct the same is not fatal to the prosecution case.

Judgment :-

Padmanabhan Nair, J.

Criminal Appeal Nos.1207 of 2004 and 1083 of 2005 and Criminal Revision Petition No.2373 of 2004 arise from the judgment rendered by the I Additional Sessions Judge, Thrissur in S.C.No.201 of 1995, which, in turn, arose from C.P.No.2 of 1994 of JFCM, Kunnakulam (Crime No.95 of 1993 of Kunnamkulam Police Station registered under sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 342, 324 and 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code). Criminal Appeal No.1544 of 2004 is filed by the complainant in C.P.1 of 1995 on the file the JFCM Kunnamkulam from which S.C.202 of 1995 arose. That Criminal Appeal is directed against the acquittal of the respondents in that appeal stated to have been passed in S.C.No.202 of 1995.

2. The facts relevant for the disposal of the appeals and Criminal Revision Petition are as follows” Deceased Suresh Babu was an active worker of Bharatheeya Janatha Party (BJP for short). He was employed as a motor winding mechanic at Kunnamkulam. There were political clashes between the followers of Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPI (M) for short) and BJP loyalists. At about 8.00 p.m. on 10-3-1993, deceased Suresh Babu was returning to his house in a State Carriage Bus by name Babu, bearing Registration No.KRH/03. When the bus reached Ottappilavu Centre at 8.15 p.m. the accused (20 persons) in Crime No.95 of 1993 formed themselves into members of an unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapons like sticks, rafters, knife etc. stopped the bus. A1, A2, A4 and A5 entered into the bus, caught hold of Suresh Babu, who was sitting in one of the rear seats of the bus and pulled him out of the bus. He was taken to the front side of the bus. The first accused inflicted a stab injury on the back of the left side of the chest of Suresh Babu. He fell down on his front. The first accused inflicted two more stab injuries on the person of Suresh Babu. At that point of time, the other accused beat Suresh Babu with sticks and rafters. Thereafter the accused ran away from the spot. A person, who witnesses the incident, made a telephone call to the Kunnamkulam Police Station and informed P.W.14, the Head Constable attached to the Kunnamkulam Police Station, that a clash was going on at Ottappilavu Centre. The caller did not disclose his identity. On getting the information, P.W.14, along with Police Constable went to the place in a police jeep. By that time, all the shops at Ottappilavu Centre were closed and the area was deserted. The police party saw a person lying on the road margin with bleeding injuries. He was unconscious. He was immediately removed to the Kunnamkulam General Hospital. The Medical Officer on duty examined the person and pronounced him dead. P.W.1 went to the police station and gave Ext.P1 First Information Statement at 12 midnight which was recorded by P.W.15, the Sub Inspector of Police. P.W.15 registered Ext.P1(a) F.I.R. against 11 named persons and 190 others who could be identified by sight. P.W.15 conducted inquest on the dead body of Suresh Baby between 9.45 a.m. and 12.45 p.m. on 11-3-1993. Thereafter post mortem examination on the dead body was conducted by P.W.13, the Assistant Professor of Forensic Medicine attached to the Medical College Hospital, Thrissur. He issued Ext.P11 post mortem certificate. Subsequent investigation was conducted by P.W.16, the Circle Inspector of Police. He filed Ext.P14 report arraigning 20 persons as accused in the case. He filed the final report on 16-12-1994 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kunnamkulam. The case was numbered as C.P.2 of 1994. All the accused except A4 appeared before the Magistrate. The learned Magistrate split up and refilled the case as against A4 as C.P.13 of 1993 and included the same in the Register for Long Pending Cases. The case as against other accused was committed to the Court of Sessions. That case was numbered as S.C.No.201 of 1995.

3. Dissatisfied with the investigation conducted by P.W.16, P.W.12, the father o

























































































































































































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