Back
2019 Supreme(Ker) 1088
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A.M. Shaffique, A.M. Babu, JJ.
Muhammad Afsal - Appellants
Vs.
The Sub-Inspector of Police, Thalassery Police Station and Ors. - Respondent
Crl. A. No. 1221 of 2014
Decided On : 12-04-2019
For the Appellant : Sunny Mathew, Adv.
Other Present: S. Ambika Devi, Spl. P.S. to Judge
The judgment establishes that strong evidence can outweigh the need for a clear motive in a murder case.
Headnote:
Motive - Murder - Secs 302 and 447 of IPC
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted and sentenced for the murder of a college student who refused his proposal for a love affair. He criminally trespassed into the victim's house and chopped her to death with a billhook.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the appellant guilty of murder and criminal trespass based on strong evidence including eyewitness testimonies, scientific evidence, and the appellant's actions immediately after the incident.
Issues: The court considered the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, delay in recording statements, and the lack of evidence for the motive.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that motive loses importance when the evidence is strong and concluded that the appellant committed the murder and criminal trespass.
Final Decision: The court upheld the appellant's conviction and sentences, dismissing the appeal.
JUDGMENT :
A.M. Babu, J.
1. Appellant was the sole accused in S.C. 576/2013. That was a case on the file of the court of session, Thalassery division. The appellant was tried, convicted and sentenced by the first additional sessions judge of the said court. The offences for which the appellant was convicted and sentenced were those punishable under Secs 302 and 447 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
2. Prosecution case is this : Shafna was a college student. She was residing with her parents. The appellant proposed to Shafna to have a love affair. She refused. He therefore had a grudge against her. He criminally trespassed into the courtyard of her house. He chopped her to death. He with a billhook cut her on her neck, head, hands and other parts of her body. The incident occurred at 12.45 pm on 23.1.2014 at the courtyard of her house.
3. Charges were framed against the appellant under Secs 302 and 447 of IPC. He denied the charges. PWs 1 to 20 were examined and Exts. P1 to P25 and MOs 1 to 11 were marked on the side of the prosecution. Exts. D1 and D2 were marked on the defence side during the course of prosecution evidence. Exts. C1 an C2 were also marked. The appellant was examined under Sec. 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C). He denied the incriminating evidence and circumstances relied on by the prosecution. He was not acquitted under Sec. 232 of Cr.P.C. Hence he was called upon to enter on his defence and adduce evidence. He chose not to adduce any evidence.
4. The trial court found the appellant guilty of both the offences charged against him. He was sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 50,000/- under Sec. 302 of IPC. Under Sec. 447 of IPC, he was imposed a punishment of rigorous imprisonment for three months and a fine of Rs. 500/-. Separate sentences in default of payment of the fine amount were also imposed. The substantive sentences of imprisonment were directed to run concurrently. The mother of the victim was awarded a compensation of Rs. 40,000/- from out of the fine amount.
5. Heard Sri. Sunny Mathew, the learned counsel for the appellant and Smt. S. Ambika Devi, the learned special public prosecutor for cases involving atrocities against women and children.
6. Shafna had her untimely death at the age of 18. She died on 23.1.2004. It was a homicide. Her homicidal death is an admitted as well as a proved fact. She was brought dead to the government general hospital at Thalassery. PW 8, assistant surgeon, confirmed the death and sent the body to the mortuary. PW 17, the district police surgeon, conducted autopsy. Ext. P19 is the report of autopsy. PW 17 found 29 ante-mortem wounds on the corpse. He described all those wounds in Ext. P19. He deposed to those wounds in court. The learned trial judge extracted all the wounds in the impugned judgment. Therefore those injuries need not be reproduced once again. Injury Nos. 1, 5 to 11, 13 to 18, 21 to 25 and 28 are incised wounds. Injury Nos. 2 to 4, 12, 19 and 20 are chop wounds. Injury Nos. 26, 27 and 29 are multiple small abrasions, abraded contusion and contusion respectively. Wounds were mostly inflicted on the neck and the head. The prosecution proved that Shafna was murdered. Ocular evidence and circumstantial evidence are relied on by the prosecution to prove the complicity of the appellant.
7. PW 2 is the ocular witness for the prosecution. She is the mother of the victim. PW 2 spoke as follows : The incident occurred at 12.45 pm on 23.1.2004. She alone was in the house at the time of the incident. Being a Friday, her husband had gone to the mosque for his juma prayer. PW 2 was sitting in her house in the varandah which was covered with grills. Her daughter came in an autorickshaw. The daughter came to the mother for money to pay the fare to the driver of the autorickshaw. The fare was paid to the driver. PW 2 went to the kitchen. She heard the cry of her daughter. PW 2 came to the front of her house. At that time Shafna was running towards th
