Point of Law: Powers of appellate court in an appeal from conviction provided under Sec. 386(b) Cr.P.C. do not enable this Court to order re-investigation,de novo investigation or fresh investigation on allowing the appeal and acquitting the accused.

JUDGMENT :

M.R. Anitha, J.

1. Appellant is the accused in S.C.No.1108/2014 on the file of I Additional Sessions Court, Mavelikkara. He has been convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- in default to undergo further imprisonment for a period of two years under Sec.302 IPC.

2. Prosecution case in short is that on 18.06.2014 in between 3.45 p.m – 5 p.m accused caused the death of deceased Hafijul Mohammed @ Kaliya by beating on the right side of head and face with a wooden piece. Accused and deceased Kaliya were close friends and employees of PW1 and commenced residence in the hall situated on the rear side of the Wood Craft Industries Workshop of PW1; 2-3 days before the incident. Both of them belong to Matelli Panchayath, Jalpaiguri District in West Bengal and came to Kerala in search of work for their livelihood. There used to be frequent quarrels between them by reason of refusal to repay money borrowed by the deceased and for not assisting the accused in preparing food. On 18.06.2014 both of them were seen together at 3 p.m proceeding to the hall with vegetables purchased, situated at a lower level to the workshop. At about 3.45 p.m accused came to the workshop to fetch a wooden piece. Thereafter, Kalia was found dead at about 5.45 p.m by PW2 inside the hall with injuries on the head and face disfigured. PW3 informed the matter to CW9 Jackson, PW1's son who in turn informed PW1, who had been to Marthandam, his native place. PW1, the employer, immediately commenced his journey back and reached Kudassanad at 11.30 p.m and saw the deceased lying dead in the hall attached to his workshop. He went to Nooranadu Police Station and lodged the F.I.S. PW11 the Sub Inspector of Police, Nooranadu recorded Ext.P1 FIS and registered Ext.P12 FIR.

3. PW13 Circle Inspector, Mannar who was in additional charge of Circle Inspector, Mavelikkara, conducted the initial investigation and arrested the accused on 21.06.2014 and questioned the witnesses, followed by PW12 the Circle Inspector, Mavelikkara, who also conducted part of investigation and forwarded the material objects to Court with forwarding note sending the articles to the Forensic Science Laboratory. Thereafter PW14, the successor of PW12 continued the investigation completed the same and filed Final Report.

4. On the side of prosecution, PWs 1 to 14 were examined, Exts.P1 to P24 were marked and MOs 1 to 10 were identified and marked. After the closure of prosecution evidence, accused was questioned u/s. 313(1)(b) Cr.P.C. After denying the incriminating aspects put to him under Section 313, in addition, he stated that on 18.06.2014 he went alone to the Primary Health Centre, Pandalam and after that to Muttar. In the evening CW9 called him and asked him to come home. When he reached back, he was locked in a room. Thereafter police came and he was arrested. For three days he was in the police station. DW1 was examined and Exts.D1 and D2 were marked on the side of defence. Ultimately accused was found guilty u/s.302 IPC and convicted and sentenced thereunder.

5. Advocate Sri. Padmalayan P.P., State Brief was heard on behalf of the appellant/accused and Sri. Alex M. Thombra, learned Public Prosecutor was heard on behalf of respondent/State. Lower Court records were called for and examined in detail.

6. Advocate P.P.Padmalayan (State Brief) would vehemently contend that the entire investigation was tainted so as to protect the actual culprits, PW2 and CW9 and to falsely implicate the accused a poor migrant labourer. Accused and deceased were close friends and both of them are from the same district in West Bengal. Motive alleged is so flimsy and cannot be accepted and is not proved. PW11 the Sub Inspector of Police on getting information about the crime did not visit the spot. There is inordinate delay in registering the FIR. Wages to the tune of Rs.30,000/-was due from PW1 to the deceased. There was demand of this amount by the deceased since he was