The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on witness testimony, medical evidence, and motive to establish guilt under Section 302 IPC.

Sudheendra Kumar, J.

The appellant is the first accused in S.C.No.536 of 2007 on the files of the Sessions Court, Palakkad, who in this appeal challenges the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial court under Section 302 I.P.C.

2. The prosecution allegation is that on 24.5.2006 at about 6 p.m., the appellant inflicted fatal injuries on the head, neck and other parts of the body of deceased Mallika with MO1 chopper at the courtyard of the house of the deceased and as a consequence, she succumbed to the injuries at or about the same time. The above incident was witnessed by PW4, who informed the matter to PW3, who in turn went to the police station and gave Ext.P2 F. I. statement to PW9. After recording Ext.P2 statement, PW9 registered Ext.P2(a) F.I.R. The investigation was taken over by PW10 on 25.5.2006. He conducted inquest on the body of the deceased Mallika on the same day and prepared Ext.P3 inquest report. He did not prepare any separate scene mahazar as the place of occurrence was clearly described in Ext.P3. The appellant was taken into custody by the police constables, who were on surveillance duty at the place of occurrence, with the assistants of local people at 2 a.m. on 3.8.2006. On getting information regarding the same, PW1 proceeded to the spot. Then, PW10 could see the appellant with the police constables and the local people. The appellant was carrying MO10 bag at that time. PW10 took the appellant to the police station. PW10 arrested the appellant at 3 p.m. on that day. MO10 bag was checked by PW10. MO1 chopper and other items were recovered from MO10 bag. PW10 conducted the investigation. After completing the investigation, PW10 laid the charge before the Magistrate court concerned. After completing the legal formalities, the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Palakkad. The Sessions Court made over the case to the trial court for trial and disposal in accordance with law.

3. Since the appellant and the other accused did not plead guilty, the trial was conducted. In the trial, PW1 to PW12 were examined and Exts.P1 to P13 were marked for the prosecution, besides identifying MO1 to MO17. Ext.D1 contradiction in the CD Statement of PW4 and Ext.D2 contradiction in the CD Statement of PW8 were marked during their cross-examination.

4. After closing the prosecution evidence, the appellant was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., wherein he denied the incriminating materials appearing in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. Thereafter, since there was no scope for an acquittal under section 232 Cr.P.C, the court below called upon the appellant to enter on his defence. However, the appellant did not adduce any defence evidence. After evaluating the evidence, the court below found the appellant guilty under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and convicted him thereunder and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs.10,000/- with a default clause for rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 302 IPC. The second and the third accused were tried only for the offence under Section 201 read with Section 34 IPC and they were acquitted by the trial court for the said offence.

5. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant Sri. S. Sachithananda Pai and the learned Public Prosecutor Sri. Rajesh Vijayan.

6. The prosecution mainly relies on the evidence of PW4 and the medical evidence of PW12 along with Ext.P13 postmortem certificate to connect the appellant with the commission of the offence. PW4 is the daughter of deceased Mallika, who witnessed the incident. The evidence of PW4 is that on the fateful day at about 5.30 p.m., she came back to her house after her work and thereafter, she went near to the well situated near to the house to take bath. While she was about to take bath, she heard a cry from the house. Immediately, she rushed to the house. Then, she saw the appellant inflicting cut injuries on deceased Mallika with a chopper. Thereafter, the appe