The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on circumstantial evidence, recent possession of stolen property, chemical examination of hair, and postmortem report to establish the guilt of the accused and determine the appropriate penalty for the offences committed.

Sreedharan, J.

Appellant in Criminal Appeal 250/1992 was charged with offences under Ss.376, 392 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned Sessions Judge convicted him for all the said offences. For the offence under S.302 of the Penal Code, accused was sentenced to death, subject to confirmation by the High Court. Accused was also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years for the offence under S.376 and for five years under S.392 of the Code. Accused challenges the conviction and sentences passed against him by filing Criminal Appeal 250 of 1992. Proceedings submitted by the Sessions Court for confirmation of the sentence of death was numbered as R.T.I of 1992. We heared counsel representing the accused and the learned Additional Director General of Prosecution in detail.

2. Prosecution case, in a nutshell, is to the following effect.--Bindu, aged 17 years, daughter of PW-2, was studying for the 1st year of the Pre-Degree course in Universal Tutorial College, Palode. As usual, she went to the tutorial college at about 8.30 A.M. on 4-4-1991. Usually Bindu was to reach home by about 4.00 P.M. On 4-4-1991, she did not reach home at the usual time. PW-4, while returning home through the pathway passing through the Anjili plantation, after getting down from the bus, found the books, geometry box and chappels of Bindu scattered on the pathway. She also saw a red shirt by the side of the above articles on the pathway. She sent word to PW-2 about the presence of the books and other articles belonging to Bindu on the pathway. PW-2 went to the spot along with her daughter, PW-3.They could not find any of the above mentioned articles or Bindu. Meanwhile dead body of Bindu was located inside the forest about 96 metres to the west of that pathway.

3. PW-1, the brother-in-law of deceased Bindu - elder sister's husband, came to know of the death of Bindu from passengers in the bus in which he was travelling. He got down at Adappupara and proceeded to the spot, where people of the locality had already gathered. He found the dead body of Bindu. Immediately he rushed to the police station at Pangode and tendered Ext.P1 First Information Statement to PW-17, the Assistant Sub Inspector of Police. On the basis of that statement, PW-17 registered Ext. P1(a), F.I.R., at 6-40 P.M. PW-18, Circle Inspector of Police, took up the investigation on the same night. On the basis of the information gathered from witnesses, he took the accused into custody at 12.45 A.M. on 5-4-1991- during the same night. PW-18 completed the investigation. His successor in office, PW-19, after verifying the records, laid the charge before Court against the accused for the offences mentioned earlier.

4. To prove the guilt of the accused, PWs.1 to 19 were examined and Exts. P1 to P16 proved. MOs.1 to 29 were also marked on the side of the prosecution. No evidence, either documentary or oral, was let in by the accused.

5. In this case, there is no eyewitness to the occurrence. Prosecution tries to bring home the guilt of the accused on circumstantial evidence. When a case rests on circumstantial evidence, such evidence must satisfy three tests: (1) the circumstances from which an inference of guilt is sought to be drawn, must be cogently and firmly established; (2) those circumstance should be of a definite tendency unerringly pointing towards guilt of the accused; and (3) the circumstances, taken cumulatively, should form a chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probability the crime was committed by the accused and none else (vide Gambhir v. State of Maharashtra - AIR 1982 SC 1157; Jaharlal Das v. State of Orissa - AIR 1991SC1388). The circumstantial evidence must be complete in all respects in order to point to the guilt of the accused. It should not be inconsistent with his innocence. In the instant case, prosecutions attempt was to show that the evidence not only is consistent with the guilt of the accuse