2015 Supreme(Ker) 726
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
V.K. MOHANAN & RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., JJ.
MEHABUL - APPELLANT
Vs.
STATE OF KERALA - RESPONDENT
Crl.A.831 of 2010
Decided On : 10.7.2015
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : SRI. K.S. MADHUSOODANAN, SRI. T.V. JAYAKUMAR NAMBOODIRI, SRI. THUSHAR NIRMAL SARATHY, SRI. M.M. VINOD KUMAR, SRI. P.K. RAKESH KUMAR, SMT. M.A. RUXANA.
For the Respondent: SRI. TOME JOSE PADINJAREKKARA.
Headnote:
Criminal Laws - legal proof - unimpeachable evidence - Findings of - Held, mental distance between 'may be' and 'must be' is quite large, and divides vague conjectures from sure conclusions. - court must ensure, that miscarriage of justice is avoided, and if the facts and circumstances of a case so demand, then the benefit of doubt must be given to the accused, keeping in mind that a reasonable doubt is not an imaginary, trivial or a merely probable doubt, but a fair doubt that is based upon reason and common sense. - court has a duty to ensure that mere conjectures or suspicion do not take the place of legal proof - Large distance between 'may be' true and 'must be' true, must be covered by way of clear, cogent and unimpeachable evidence produced by the prosecution, before an accused is condemned as a convict, and the basic and golden rule must be applied
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, J.
1. The accused No. 1 is the appellant. He along with a co-worker, Hakku Bullu, were charged for offences under section 392, 376 (G), 302 & S 202 r/w S. 34 of the IPC and S.3 (2) and (v) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for having committed gang rape and murder and also for causing disappearance of evidence of "the deceased" (the name is withheld), a 22 year old female.
2. The learned Sessions Judge, Kollam, found that the case against the 2nd accused has not been proved by the prosecution but found the appellant guilty, and holding so, convicted and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life for the offence under section 302. He was also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years each under section 376 (2) (g) and under section 392 of the IPC. For the offence under section 201 of the IPC, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years. The accused challenges the finding, conviction and sentence in this appeal.
3. Skeletal facts and circumstances are narrated below :-
(i) The appellant, a native of West Bengal, along with the second accused and eight others had come to Kerala about three months back from the date of incident and started their work at the Sreedevi Brick Factory of Ajithkumar - PW7. "The deceased ", was working in a cashew factory by name St Mary's cashew factory at Puthoor. The said factory was situated about 4.5 km from her residential home. Her mother Bhavani - PW4 and her friend Latha PW6 were also working in the same factory. On 22.12.2006, after the work in the cashew factory, "the deceased" along with PW4 proceeded home. PW4 went to the market and "the deceased" went along with her friend Latha and parted ways at Achanvila about 50 metre from the tea shop of PW 5 through a bund road which provided easy access for her to reach home. On her way, she passed the shop room of PW 5 where the accused and other workers were having tea. According to the prosecution, the accused left the shop at about 6:15 PM about 10-100 m behind "the deceased", and between 6.15 PM and 6. 45 PM on the same day, committed gang rape of "the deceased" by the side of the bund road leading to her house and thereafter strangulated her with a shawl and committed theft of a gold chain worn by "the deceased". It is the further case of the prosecution that after committing the offence as aforesaid, "the deceased" was packed in a sack, while she was still alive and after putting in bricks and a rock inside the sack, was tied and sealed with a cloth, and was left immersed in a waterlogged area belonging to PW 6 - Babukuttan Pillai on the eastern side of the bund road with the intention of causing disappearance of the dead body and thus screening themselves from punishment. "The deceased" drowned to death as a result.
(ii). When "the deceased" did not return home as usual, PW1, her father went in search of her. When it didn't yield any result he submitted Exhibit P1 statement before PW 31, the Sub Inspector of Police, Sasthamkotta who registered P1 (a) FIR under the heard "woman missing".
(iii) On the next day, while PW1 was going in search of his daughter, he noticed that the grass and vegetation near to the brick kiln of PW 7 were trampled, with signs of activity on the banks of the water logged area as well. He, through CW13 - Baiju, informed the police. The police reached the scene and they obtained the assistance of PW3 Abraham, to enter into the water and to conduct an inspection of the area, which is waterlogged due to mining of clay. After much effort, PW3 met with success and he was able to locate a sack. Thereafter PW33, the Circle inspector came to the scene and when the sack was opened the dead body of "the deceased" was found inside along with the weighty materials put in apparently to prevent the sack from surfacing.
(iv) The investigation was carried out by PW33, who conducted Inquest over the dead body