IMPORTANT POINTS
The injuries noted as ante-mortem would sufficiently show an indiscriminate attack on the victim. Both the testicles of the victim was crushed by hand. There are grazed abrasions on inner side of both the left and right thigh which would prima facie show the struggle and attempt on the part of the victim to escape himself from the attack. The cruelty meted out in the hands of accused No.1, pushing his head as against wall, window pan and door and crushing of both the testicles would sufficiently show what actually intended by accused No.1. The various acts itself will show knowledge on the part of the accused as to the consequences of his act and hence satisfies all the ingredients which would constitute S.300 IPC and no exceptions attached to the said Section either brought out or let in evidence.

Somarajan, J.

Against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence in S.C.No.537 of 2013, dated 1.12.2014, of the Additional Sessions Court, Muvattupuzha, accused No.1 came up with this appeal.

2. Accused Nos.1 and 2 were charge sheeted for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 201 read with S.34 of the Indian Penal Code. Accused No.2 was found not guilty of offence and hence acquitted by the learned Sessions Judge. No appeal is preferred against the order of acquittal. Hence, we are only concerned with the conviction rendered as against accused No.1, the appellant herein, for the offence punishable under Ss.302 and 201 IPC.

3. The alleged incident happened at about 6.30 p.m. on 13.1.2013 by which the deceased Sivan, son of Chandran, met with a sad death. The prosecution case is that it is accused Nos.1 and 2 in furtherance of a common intention to commit murder consumed alcohol along with the deceased in the room situated in Narayana Memorial Building and by 6.30 p.m. accused Nos.1 and 2 hit the head of the deceased against the wall, door frame and window frame causing serious injuries to him, accused No.1 throttled him with his hands, accused No.2 beat over his head with a wooden stick and crushed his genitalia by his hands and as a result, he succumbed to the injuries on the same day. The dead body was concealed under a cot and later on abandoned on the courtyard of the building between 8.30 and 9 p.m. on the same day.

4. There is no eye witness to the alleged incident. Hence the prosecution heavily relied on the circumstantial evidence, especially the last seen theory through PW3 and PW4 and Ext.P19 FSL report, to bring home the guilt of accused. The recovery of MO4 wooden stick, presence of blood stain in the room of accused No.1 and the oral evidence tendered by PW1 that he had seen accused No.1 cleaning the verandah of his room also relied on by the prosecution.

5. Accused No.1 was occupying a room in the first floor of the building. According to the prosecution, the alleged incident had happened by 6.30 p.m. inside the said room. PW1 is one of the residents in the neighbouring room. The dead body of the deceased was found lying on the courtyard of the said building. The incident happened on 13.1.2013, according to him. The above said lodge is belonged to one Mohanan. PW1 was occupying the room next to the room of accused No.1. He was very much present in his room from 12.30 noon onwards on the ill fated day. It was the usual practice of accused Nos.1 and 2 to consume alcohol in their room. On the ill fated day he had seen accused No.2 proceeding towards the room of accused No.1 at about 6 p.m.. He heard some conversation from the room of accused No.1. There was an electricity power break by 8.30 p.m. on that day. He heard some sound by that time. So he came out of the room and seen accused Nos.1 and 2 engaged in cleaning and washing the verandah. He had also seen a person lying on the courtyard of the building. The only evidence brought out through PW1 is that he had seen accused No.2 going to the room of accused No.1 by 6.30 p.m. on that day and he had seen them cleaning the verandah by 8.30 p.m. At that time, the deceased was lying dead on the courtyard of the said building.

6. It is through PW3 and PW4 the prosecution tried to invoke last seen theory as against accused Nos.1 and 2. PW3 testified that he had seen accused No.1 along with deceased Sivan proceeding in a bike towards Perumbavoor by 3 p.m. on the ill fated day. The oral evidence tendered through PW4 further shows that both the accused and the victim came there in a bike by 3 p.m. on the ill fated day and both of them climbed the stair case and went to the room of accused No.1. The dead body of the deceased was found lying in front of the said building by 8.30 p.m. PW1 had seen both accused Nos.1 and 2 by 8.30 p.m. and they were found cleaning and washing the verandah of the room.

7. The medical evidence tendered would show that the victim h