SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Ker) 236

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM, JJ
Manoharan S/o. Rajan - Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala - Respondent
CRL.A NO. 1624 OF 2023
Decided On : 18-03-2025

Advocates Appeared:
BY ADVS. I.V.PRAMOD SAIRA SOURAJ P. RESMI SAJEEVAN
SMT. NEEMA T.V., SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

IMPORTANT POINT
The prosecution must establish a clear causal link between an accused's actions and the resulting death; failure to do so may lead to a conviction for a lesser offense.

Headnote:

(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 325 - Appeal against conviction for murder - The appellant was initially convicted under Section 302 IPC for causing death but was later found guilty under Section 325 IPC for causing grievous hurt - The prosecution failed to establish a direct causal link between the injuries inflicted and the death of the deceased due to lack of medical evidence and complications arising post-injury. (Paras 34 - 36 )

(B) Causation in Criminal Law - The court emphasized that the prosecution must establish a clear causal link between the act and the death, noting that complications or delays in death could disrupt this chain. (Paras 28 - 32 )

(C) Eyewitness Testimony - The court found the testimony of eyewitnesses credible regarding the altercation but noted inconsistencies regarding the cause of death and injury specifics. (Paras 27 - 35 )

Facts of the case:

The appellant was accused of murdering Muniyappan during an altercation on 02.10.2018, where he allegedly assaulted the deceased with a stone and banged his head on the road. Muniyappan succumbed to injuries later on 13.11.2018. (Paras 1 - 3 )

Findings of Court:

The court determined that the prosecution did not conclusively establish a direct causal link between the injuries and the death, leading to a conviction under Section 325 instead of Section 302 IPC. (Paras 34 - 36 )

Issues: The main issues addressed included whether the appellant's actions directly caused the death of Muniyappan and the adequacy of evidence supporting the charge under Section 302 IPC. (Paras 34 - 35 )

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that while the appellant's actions led to grievous hurt, the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that these actions directly caused death, necessitating a conviction under Section 325 IPC. (Paras 34 - 36 )

Result: The appeal is partly allowed; conviction under Section 302 IPC is set aside, and the appellant is convicted under Section 325 IPC with a sentence of five years of rigorous imprisonment.

JUDGMENT

Raja Vijayaraghavan, J.

This appeal is preferred against the judgment dated 04.03.2021 in S.C.No. 245 of 2019 on the file of the Court of Session, Kozhikode. In the said case, the appellant was indicted for having committed an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code .

2. By the impugned judgment, he was found guilty and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of ?50,000/-, with a default clause, for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC .

3. According to the prosecution, the appellant is a rag-picker by profession.He along with the deceased Muniyappan used to be engaged in collecting scrap materials in the city of Kozhikode. On 02.10.2018 at about 9:45 a.m., the first informant as well as PWs 1 and 2 are alleged to have seen the appellant and the deceased engaged in an altercation under the AKG Over Bridge situated at Nagaram Amsom Desom in Kozhikode. It is alleged that the appellant took a granite stone and after exhorting Muniyappan that he would be killed, hit him on his head. When the deceased fell down, the appellant is alleged to have sat on his body, held his head, and banged it on the road. The local people assembled at the spot and they intimated the police. The injured was shifted to the Government Medical College Hospital, Kozhikode. Urgent Craniotomy was done, and after undergoing treatment for some time, his family members took the deceased to the KAPV Govt. Medical College, Tamil Nadu and thereafter to the MGM Govt. Hospital, Trichy. His discharge from the Medical College Hospital, Kozhikode, was on 16.10.2018. While undergoing treatment in various hospitals at Trichy, as there was no improvement, the deceased was discharged from the hospital. While he was convalescing at home, on13.11.2018, at 5:00 p.m., he breathed his last.

4. The records before this Court reveal that the First Information Statement was furnished by one Vincent Elanhikkal before the Chemmangad Police Station at 2:18 p.m. on 02.10.2018. Based on the information so furnished, Crime No. 167 of 2018 was registered under Section 307 of the IPC . Thereafter, the investigation was taken over by PW15, the Sub Inspector of Police, Chemmangad Police Station. After taking over the investigation, she went to the hospital and found that the injured was unconscious. The Investigating Officer then went to the hospital on 12.10.2018 and recorded the statement of Dr. Soman, who had conducted surgery. The Officer realized that on 16.10.2018, the injured was discharged from the hospital and taken to his native place. She recorded the statement of the daughter of the deceased, who was informed that in case of any untoward development, she should inform PW15. On 14.11.2018, PW15 was informed by Ranjitha (PW4), the daughter of the deceased, that her father had passed away. The Investigating Officer asked her not to conduct funeral ceremonies, and immediately rushed to Tamil Nadu and reached Karur District at about 5:00 p.m. On reaching there, she realised that on 13.11.2018 at 11:00 p.m., Muniyappan had passed away and that he had already been cremated. Later, she recorded the statements of the family members of the deceased and obtained records from the hospital, where he was treated. She obtained the One and the Same Certificate from the Village Office since Muniyappan was called by some other name as well. The Death Certificate from the concerned Village Officer was also obtained. After returning back, she went to the place of occurrence and seized MO1, which is alleged to be the stone used by the accused for infliction of the injuries. MO1 stone was forwarded to the Forensic Science Lab. After completion of the investigation, the final report was laid before the jurisdictional court.

5. Committal proceedings were initiated by the learned Magistrate in accordance with the law, and the case was committe


      Click Here to Read the rest of this document
      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8
      9
      10
      11
      SupremeToday Portrait Ad
      supreme today icon
      logo-black

      An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

      Please visit our Training & Support
      Center or Contact Us for assistance

      qr

      Scan Me!

      India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

      For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

      whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
      whatsapp-icon Back to top