Back
1987 Supreme(Ker) 404
Judges : U.L.BHAT,SHAMSUDDIN
PONNUMANI - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA - Respondent
Case No : R.T. No. 3 of 1987, Crl.A. No. 158 of 1987, Crl.A. No. 278 of 1987
Decided On : 08/25/1987
Advocates Appeared :
M.N. Sukumaran Nair; For Appellants Public Prosecutor; For Respondent
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on circumstantial evidence, corroboration, and the credibility of witness testimony, particularly that of a child witness, in reaching a conviction. The judgment also highlights the application of S.302, S.201, S.109, and S.34 of the IPC in determining the guilt and sentencing of the accused.
Headnote:
IPC - Trial of Accused for Offences under S.302, 201 and 109 IPC - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed and referenced S.302, S.201, S.109, and S.34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in reaching its decision. The key legal provisions interpreted include the definition of murder, abetment, and conspiracy under the IPC. These provisions influenced the court's decision on the guilt and sentencing of the accused.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased, Narayanan Guptan, was allegedly murdered by the accused, with the fifth accused being the brain behind the murder and in conspiracy with the fourth accused. The prosecution presented circumstantial evidence and witness testimony to establish the events leading to the murder. The accused attempted to stage the murder as a suicide by hanging the body and leaving a fabricated note.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the fourth accused guilty under S.302 read with S.34 IPC and S.201 IPC, sentencing him to life imprisonment. The fifth accused was also found guilty under S.302 read with S.109 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment. The court acquitted accused 1 to 3 of all charges.
Issues: The main issues revolved around the credibility of the evidence, particularly the testimony of a child witness, and the presence of corroboration for the prosecution's case. The court also considered the motive, circumstantial evidence, and the authenticity of the fabricated suicide note.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the testimony of the child witness, P.W.2, and found it to be credible despite initial reluctance to disclose the events. The court also emphasized the presence of corroboration through circumstantial evidence, motive, and expert analysis of the fabricated suicide note, leading to the conviction of the accused.
Final Decision: The court confirmed the conviction and sentencing of the accused, altering the fourth accused's conviction from S.302 to S.302 read with S.34 IPC and commuting the death sentence to life imprisonment. The sentences entered against the fourth accused under S.302 read with S.34 IPC and S.201 IPC were ordered to run concurrently.
1. The five accused were tried in the Court of Session, Palghat for offences under S.302, 201 and 109 IPC Accused 1 and 2 were tried for offences under S.302 and 201, IPC Accused 3 and 4 were tried for offences under S.302 read with S.34, IPC as also S.201 IPC. Fifth accused was tried for the offence under S.302, IPC read with S.109, IPC Ultimately the Sessions Court convicted the fourth accused under S.302, IPC. and imposed sentence of death subject to confirmation by this court and further convicted him under S.201, IPC and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for three years. The court also convicted the fifth accused under S.302, IPC read with S.109, IPC and sentenced her to undergo imprisonment for life. Accused 1 to 3 were acquitted of all charges. Referred Trial has arisen on account of sentence of death. Fourth accused has filed Crl. A. 158 of 1987 and fifth accused has filed Crl. A. 278 of 1987.
2. Prosecution case can be summarised thus. Deceased Narayanan Guptan, husband of fifth accused, was conducting a tea shop at Madurai in Tamil Nadu. He contacted leprosy and about six months prior to the occurrence he left his business at Madurai and settled down with his wife, fifth accused, his son, PW2, and younger daughter in their house at Azhiyannoor. Meanwhile fifth accused developed illegal intimacy with a neighbour and worker, fourth accused. Narayanan Guptan used to complain about this to others including his younger brother, PW4, and maternal aunt, PW3. He had cautioned fourth accused not to visit his house. Accused 4 and 5 conspired and decided to kill Narayanan Guptan. Fifth accused procured the assistance of labourers, accused 1 to 3, for consideration. On the evening of 22-12-1985 accused 1 to 3 were seen in the company of 4th accused. Earlier they were found near the house of Narayanan Guptan. During the night they were seen in the house of fourth accused. As usual 5th accused along with her son and daughter slept in a room in the house while Narayanan Guptan slept in the veranda. At about midnight fourth accused went to the house of Narayanan Guptan and told fifth accused that everything was ready and money had to be given. Fifth accused opened the box, took Rs. 300/- and paid the same to fourth accused. Fourth accused left the room. Fifth accused closed the door and went back to bed. This incident was seen by P.W.2. Some time later PW2 heard loud cries of his father saying that he was being killed. His attempt to wake up fifth accused was unsuccessful as she was pretending to be asleep. PW2 got up and peeped through the gap of the door. He heard foot steps and loud voices near the place where his father was sleeping. A short while later he heard 4th accused addressing second accused and asking him to raise the head. Neighbours also heard the cries. Next morning 5th accused raised an outcry saying that her husband had committed suicide by hanging on a tree in the neighbouring compound of PW4. Neighbours gathered. A tile was seen removed from a corner of the hams and placed near the tree with some words written in charcoal to the effect that Narayanan Guptan ended his life of his free will.
3. PW1 went to Sreekrishnapuram Police station and gave Ext.P1 statement at 10 a.m. Case suggested was one of suicide. S. I of Police, PW19, registered the case as unnatural death. He deputed PW 18, Head Constable, to conduct investigation. PW18, questioned PWs. 2,5, fifth accused and others and prepared Ext.P2 inquest report and seized MO4 tile. PW18 gathered that the case was not of suicide but one of homicide and that accused 4 and 5 were responsible for the same. Post mortem was conducted by PW12 of the Palghat District Hospital. On 26-12-1985, PW19 took ever investigation. He prepared Ext. P5 scene mahazar and seized MO 5 blood stained sand. He sent Ext.P15 report incorporating S.302 IPC, and 34 IPC on 27-12-1985 Circle Inspector of Police, PW20, took over investigation. Another report, Ext.P16, was sent implicating
