Back
1982 Supreme(Ker) 21
Judges : K.BHASKARAN,S.K.KADER
Mohammad Dwara Rawther Ismail - Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala - Respondent
Case No : Criminal Appeal No. 334 of 1981
Decided On : 01/21/1982
Advocates Appeared :
For the Appellant: M. N. Sukumaran Nayar, N. A. Muraleedharan, B. Raman Pillai, K. K. Dinesan and Sunny Varghese, Advocates. For the Respondent: Public Prosecutor.
The judgment underscores the principle that suspicion, however grave, cannot substitute legal evidence to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Headnote:
Criminal Appeal - Murder - Sections 302, 201 of the I.P.C. - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the circumstantial evidence, medical evidence, and extra judicial confession in relation to the charges under sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. The judgment highlighted the inconsistencies in the evidence, lack of credibility of witnesses, and the failure of the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
Fact of the Case:
The accused was prosecuted for murder and attempting to destroy evidence. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence and an extra judicial confession by the accused.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. It highlighted inconsistencies in the evidence, lack of credibility of witnesses, and the perfunctory nature of the investigation.
Issues: The key issues included the credibility of witnesses, admissibility of the extra judicial confession, and the sufficiency of evidence to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that suspicion, however grave, cannot substitute legal evidence to enter a conviction and sustain a sentence. It also highlighted the importance of assessing the voluntariness and veracity of an extra judicial confession.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, the convictions and sentences were set aside, and the accused was acquitted of both charges.
BHASKARAN, J.
Sri Mohammed Dwara Rawther Ismail, the accused in Sessions Case No. 35 of 1981, on the file of the Sessions Court. Trivandrum, is the appellant in this criminal appeal. He was prosecuted for offences punishable under sections 302 and 201 of the I.P.C. alleging that he had committed murder in respect of his wife Safia between 9 p.m. and 10.30 p.m. on 17-9-1980 from the house in which they resided in Kilimanoor, and that he attempted to destroy the evidence concerning the offence. The trial court found him guilty under sections 302 and 201 I.P.C., convicted him thereunder and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life under S. 302 I.P.C. and rigorous imprisonment for one year under S. 201 I.P.C., the sentences to run concurrently. Aggrieved by this conviction and sentence this appeal has been preferred.
2. The prosecution case was that the accused and Safia, whom he had married on 23-7-1978, were living in a house in Kilimanoor with their son Feroz who was aged about 2 years. Safia, a double graduate, was employed as a teacher in a Government school in Kilimanoor the accused was an overseer in the Kerala State Electricity Board. Till about one month prior to the date of occurrence the accused was in Kasaragod, occasionally paying visit to Kilimanoor to see his wife and son. He got a transfer to Kilimanoor just about a month prior to the date of occurrence and thereafter they had been staying together. On 14-9-1980 the accused left for Pathanamthitta, the place from where he hails, telling Safia that he would return the same day. However, he returned only the next morning and on that account there were wordy quarrels between the husband and wife ending in the husband beating the wife. Thereafter till the evening of the 17th there had been exchange of words, beating by the husband, the husband refusing to take food from the house etc., and the next important event is his coming back from office at about 9 p.m. on 17-9-1980.
The prosecution case is that the accused beat Safia, pushed her towards the southern wall of the bedroom, her head hit the wall, she fell down, and later on spinning a cord with one end of a sari he strangled her with the aid of that cord and further, to make it appear that it was a case of death by suicide by hanging with the other end of the sari passing over the beam of the room, he tied the other end of the sari in such a posture as to makes the appearance of Safia kneeling as a prayers. Thereafter he closed the room from outside after so manipulating the screws of the tower bolt of the door as to give way as soon as least force was applied. He then went to P.W. 3. Alima Beevi, a thirteen year aged girl who is the niece of P.W. 1, father of Safia, sleeping in another room, awakened her and asked her to knock at the door of the bedroom and call out the name of Safia to enable the accused to take some pills which he was urgently wanting. Though P.W. 3 attempted to do so, there was no response; and this was followed by the accused kicking open the door. At that time PW. 3 saw Safia in the hanging position. Though PW. 3 was asked to untie the knot, she refused to do so and the accused himself did it. Later on he went to the house of P.W. 2, about 40 meters away from his house, and told the inmates that Safia was found in an unconscious condition and that he would like to have a taxi. They came to the house and saw Safia lying on a cot. With PW 2's sister and PW. 3 who brought a taxi, Safia was taken by the accused to Sarala Hospital where PW. 7 Dr. M. Mandekures examined her and declared that she was already dead. Though PW. 7 advised the accused to take her to government hospital, as probably post-mortem might be necessary, the accused went to a friend of his by name Hameed and after returning from him, took the dead body in the same car to his house. Later, information was conveyed to the relatives of the accused and deceased Safia.
PW. 1 the father of Safia, with his wife reached
