RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., P. V. BALAKRISHNAN
Mohammed Iqbal @ Ikku S/o. Abdul Khader – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
P.V.BALAKRISHNAN, J.
Criminal Appeal No.704/2018 is filed by the 1st accused and Criminal Appeal No.1133/2018 is filed by the 2nd accused, challenging their conviction and sentence imposed under Sections 120B and 302 IPC in S.C.No.111/2011 by the Special Court (SPE/CBI)-I, Ernakulam.
The Prosecution Case:
2. The accused, five in number, entered into a criminal conspiracy to exterminate deceased Balakrishnan, who had married the daughter of the 5th accused Abubacker Haji without the consent of their family. Abubacker Haji was opposed to the marriage of his daughter Rasina with the deceased Balakrishnan and he was of the view that it brought dishonour to his family and community at large. Abubacker Haji decided to eliminate Balakrishnan once and for all and he engaged the first accused for the same. The first accused befriended Balakrishnan and with the help of the approver Abdul Hameed, got in touch with the second accused, who agreed to help the first accused for monetary consideration. Accordingly, at 10.30 pm on 18.09.2001, the first and second accused committed murder of the said Balakrishnan by stabbing him with a knife on his neck and body inside a Maruti car bearing re
Bhupan v. State of M.P. (2002) 2 SCC 556
K. Babu v. State of Kerala 2023 6 KLT 96
Mani v. State of Tamil Nadu (2009) 17 SCC 273
Muthuswamy v. State of Madras AIR 1954 SC 4
Rakesh & another v. State of U.P.& another (AIR 2021 SC 3233)
Sharad Birdhichand Sarada v. State of Maharashtra (1984) 4 SCC 116)
Soni v. State of Utter Pradesh (1982) 3 SCC 368(1)
State of Karnataka v. K.Yarappa Reddy (1999) 8 SCC 715
State of Maharashtra v. Syed Umar Sayed Abbas (2016) 4 SCC 735
Vijayan v. State (1999) 4 SCC 36
The prosecution failed to establish a complete chain of evidence linking the accused to the murder, leading to the reversal of their conviction.
Point of Law : Prosecution has failed to establish the guilt of the accused persons by facilitating worthwhile evidence. [Para 236]
Eyewitness testimony is credible and sufficient for conviction in murder cases, even without a test identification parade, and minor inconsistencies in the first information statement do not undermin....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliability of the evidence of the material witnesses and the intention of the accused persons in causing bodily injury sufficient in the ordin....
The conviction based on unreliable witness testimony and unproven motive and conspiracy led to the overturning of the judgment, highlighting the necessity for credible evidence in criminal cases.
Circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain linking the accused to the crime, excluding any reasonable hypothesis of innocence, for a conviction under Section 302 IPC.
The court emphasized that circumstantial evidence must establish a complete and unbroken chain of guilt beyond reasonable doubt, particularly in capital cases.
The prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. If there is any doubt as to the guilt of the accused, the accused must be acquitted.
Eyewitness testimony, even from an interested witness, can sustain a conviction if corroborated by credible evidence and circumstances.
The court established that while the prosecution failed to prove conspiracy, sufficient evidence existed to convict certain accused of murder and related offences.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.