Reasonable doubt and the need for a complete chain of circumstances to establish guilt in a murder case under Section 302 IPC.

JUDGMENT :

Johnson John, J.

The appellant, who is the accused in S.C. No. 551 of 2016 on the file of the First Additional Sessions Court, Ernakulam, faced trial for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC on the allegation that on 07.03.2016, at 3.30 pm., because of previous enmity and while consuming liquor along with the deceased and others in a shed in the possession of the deceased situated near ESI Hospital, Ernakulam North, the accused quarelled with the deceased and struck on the chest and various parts of the body with a brick causing fracture to the bone and injuries to internal organs and subsequently, the victim succumbed to his injuries while undergoing treatment in Medical College Hospital, Kottayam at 2 p.m. on 22.03.2016.

2. Exhibit P10 FIR was registered under Section 174 Cr.P.C. on 23.03.2016 on the basis of Exhibit P1 First Information Statement of PW1, who is the younger brother of the deceased. After completion of the investigation, final report was filed by PW17 Inspector of Police, Ernakulam Town North and after committal, the case was taken on file as S.C. No. 551 of 2016.

3. The trial of the case was conducted before the First Additional Sessions judge, Ernakulam and from the side of the prosecution, PWs 1 to 17 were examined and MO1 was marked. From the side of the accused, DW1 examined and Exhibits D1 to D9 were marked.

4. After considering the oral and documentary evidence on record and after hearing both sides, the learned Additional Sessions judge-I, Ernakulam, by the impugned judgment dated 29.05.2020, convicted the accused and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- and in default to pay fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six months for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC.

5. Heard Sri. Dinesh Mathew J. Murikan appearing for the appellant and Sri. Alex M. Thombra, Sr. Public Prosecutor.

6. The point that requires consideration is whether the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant for the offence under Section 302 IPC is legally sustainable.

7. The main arguments advanced on behalf of the appellant accused are that: (i) there is inordinate delay in registering the FIR and the same is not explained by the prosecution; (ii) the evidence of PW8 and the alleged cause of injury in Exhibit P6 wound certificate does not tally with the prosecution case regarding the date, place, time of occurrence and the assailant; (iii) PW1, the younger brother of the deceased, has no case in Exhibit P1 FIS that he witnessed the occurrence and therefore, his evidence before court that he witnessed the occurrence is not at all reliable; and (iv) the recovery of MO1 on the basis of the alleged disclosure statement of the accused is not at all reliable and the prosecution has not explained the delay in registering the FIR and producing MO1 before court. It is also argued that there are serious omissions and contradictions in the evidence of the material witnesses and that the court below relied upon assumptions and presumptions for finding the accused guilty of the offence charged against him.

8. In Exhibit P1 FIS given by PW1, it is stated that the deceased was living in a shed constructed in a puramboke property near Ernakulam North Railway Station and that PW1 came to know from the nearby autorickshaw drivers that on 07.03.2016, during day time, one Panickar @ kunjumon, who used to consume liquor with deceased, had quarreled with the deceased after consuming liquor and on the next day morning, i.e., on 08.03.2016, the deceased informed PW1 that he is suffering from body pain and he needs to go to a hospital and therefore, PW1 took his brother to the General Hospital, Ernakulam. But, when PW1 was examined before court, he deposed that he and his friends were consuming liquor in the shed of his brother from the morning of 07.03.2016 and that the accused was also with them and in the afternoon, he and the accused went to purcha