SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1998 Supreme(Ker) 628

High Court of Kerala
Nelavoy Dhinakar, K.V. Sankaranarayanan, JJ.
Samuelkutty - Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala - Respondent
Crl.A. No. 583 of 1997
Decided On : 23-06-1998

The non-explanation of injuries sustained by the accused is a crucial circumstance that can cast doubt on the prosecution's case.

Headnote:

S.302 - Murder - IPC - [S.302, S.307, S.34 IPC] - The court discussed the prosecution's case against the accused for charges under S.302 and 307 read with 34 IPC. The judgment highlighted the lack of explanation for the injuries found on the accused, the delay in the first information report reaching the court, and the unreliable testimony of related witnesses. The court applied the legal principle that the non-explanation of injuries sustained by the accused is a crucial circumstance that can cast doubt on the prosecution's case.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant was convicted for offences under S.302 and 324 IPC for his involvement in a violent altercation resulting in the death of the deceased and injuries to other individuals.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the prosecution's case lacked credibility due to inconsistencies in witness testimony, lack of explanation for injuries on the accused, and a delay in the first information report reaching the court. Consequently, the appellant was acquitted based on the benefit of doubt.

Issues: The issues revolved around the credibility of witness testimony, the explanation for injuries on the accused, and the delay in the first information report reaching the court.

Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the legal principle that the non-explanation of injuries sustained by the accused is a crucial circumstance that can cast doubt on the prosecution's case. Additionally, the delay in the first information report reaching the court was considered relevant and raised doubts about the prosecution's version.

Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and the accused/appellant was acquitted based on the benefit of doubt.

JUDGMENT

N. Dhinakar, J.

1. Appellant was the first accused in Sessions Case No. 51 of 1993 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge, Pathanamthitta. He was tried along with two other accused for charges under S.302 and 307 read with 34 IPC. The learned Sessions Judge, on the evidence adduced by the prosecution, came to the conclusion that the second and third accused in the case have to be acquitted and accordingly acquitted them, while he convicted the appellant/first accused in the case for offences under S.302 and 324 IPC. He was sentenced to imprisonment for life for the former offence and rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year for the latter offence with a direction that the sentences will run concurrently. Hence the present appeal.

2. The case of the prosecution can be briefly summarised as follows: For the sake of convenience, the appellant will be referred to as A1 and the acquitted accused as A2 and A3 in this judgment. A1 and A2 are brothers and the third accused was their servant and they were engaged in rearing ducks. They were residing 3 Kms. away from the scene place. P.W. 1 and her family were also rearing ducks. P.W. 1 is the daughter of the deceased and P.W. 2 is her father. RW. 12 is the brother of P.W. 2 and P.W. 8 is the sister in law of the deceased, i.e., the wife of P.W. 12. The deceased along with her husband P.W. 2, her daughter. P.W. I and her son, Vinod Cherian were residing near the scene place. On 25-5-1992 there was a quarrel between P.W. 2 and the first accused for which a complaint, Ext. P15 was laid by the wife of the first accused at Aranmula Police Station with P.W. 14, the Head Constable. The police called the first accused and P.W. 2 and warned them not to quarrel in future.

3. On 11-9-1992 at about 3.30 p.m. P.W. 1 was sitting and talking with her friend P.W. 6 and the ducks belonging to her were pasturing in a paddy field belonging to one Ponnachan. While she was so sitting in the house of P.W. 6 she heard quacking cries of the ducks and when she looked up, she saw A1 to A3 taking away her ducks along with their ducks. P.W. 1 then reached the place and asked the first accused as to why he was taking the ducks for which A1 replied saying "I am waiting for you". She cried aloud and on hearing the cries, the deceased came running from her house, (which is noted as No. 15 in the plan, Ext. P10). The deceased asked A1 to release the ducks, for which A1 replied "we are waiting for you". A1 then took out M.O. 1 knife and stabbed the deceased on the left chest. The deceased fell down. Then A1 to A3 beat the deceased with bamboo stick, M.O. 2 and coffee stick, M.O. 3. On hearing the cries of P.W. 1 and the deceased, the father of P.W. 1 came running from his house. After the deceased fell down, A1 stabbed on the back of the head of the deceased. Blood came out. P.W. 1 then caught hold of A1's right hand in which he was holding the knife. At that time A2 and A3 beat her. P.W. 2 came and lifted the deceased and A1 stabbed P.W. 2 on his back. On being beaten by A2 and A3 P.W. I lost the grip of A1's hand. Thereafter A1 stabbed P.W. 2 on his back, right ear and left hand. A1 also stabbed P.W. I on her right shoulder. A2 and A3 beat P.W. I on the back. She cried aloud and on hearing the cries, people gathered. According to P.W. 1, the occurrence was witnessed by P.W. 8, P.W. 4, P.W. 6 and one Chinnamma. When people came running, the accused ran away towards the east with the weapons in heir hands. After the accused left, PWs. 1 and 2 and the deceased were taken to the District Hospital at Kozhencherry by P.W. 8 and Chinnamma, where Dr. P.W. 7 on examination, pronounced the deceased dead. He admitted PWs'. 1 and 2 in the hospital. Exts. P5 and P6 are the wound certificates issued by the doctor in respect of PWs. 1 and 2.

4. On receiving telephonic information from the hospital that PWs. 1 and 2 are admitted in the District Hospital, Kozhencherry, P.W. 15 went to the hospital at 5.30 p.m. on the












Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top