Circumstantial evidence must establish a complete chain of guilt beyond reasonable doubt, with no alternative explanations.

JUDGMENT :

P.V. BALAKRISHNAN, J.

This appeal is filed by the sole accused in SC No. 551/2015 challenging his conviction and sentence imposed under Sections 436 and 302 of IPC by the Additional Sessions Court-III, Thrissur.

Prosecution case

2. Due to rancour with deceased Seena and her mother Kunjipathu, for their refusal to give in marriage Seena to the accused, the accused on 7/4/2015 at about 2 am, with an intention to commit their murder, poured petrol into the bed room of their house where they were sleeping and set them and their house on fire. Due to this act, the entire house of the victim was burned down and Kunjipathu got killed. Seena also sustained serious burn injuries and she later died on 16/4/2015. Hence, the prosecution alleged that the accused had committed the offences under Sections 436 and 302 IPC .

Proceedings before the trial court.

3. From the side of the prosecution, PW1 to PW36 were examined and Exts.P1 to P41 and MO1 and MO2 were marked. When the accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C, he denied all the incriminating circumstances brought against him in evidence and contended that he is innocent. From the side of the accused no evidence was adduced. The trial court, on an appreciation of the evidence on record, found the accused guilty and convicted him under Sections 436 and 302 IPC . The accused was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- under Section 436 IPC . In case of default, he was ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. He was also sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- under Section 302 IPC . In case of default, the accused was ordered to undergo Rigorous imprisonment for two years.

A conspectus of the prosecution evidence

4. PW1 is the son of the deceased Kunjipathu. He deposed that on 7/4/2015 at about 2am, he received a phone call informing him that his family house is on fire. When he reached there, he saw the police, fire force personnels and locals trying to douse the fire. He also understood that his sister Seena had been taken to the Medical College Hospital. The fire force personnel brought out the charred body of his mother. Thereafter, he went to the police station and lodged Ext.P1 FIS. He also stated that the accused, who was earlier residing nearby, was very close to his mother and sister and had even asked his mother for Seena's hand. But no one was in favour of the proposal. The accused had loaned an amount of Rs.10,000/- to his mother and he had repaid Rs.2,000/- from it. On an earlier occasion, the accused had inserted a live electric wire into the house of his mother and when objected, had taken it back. When he questioned the accused, he repeated his request to marry off Seena to him.

5. PW5 is a neighbour of deceased Kunjipathu and Seena. He deposed that on 7/4/2015 at about 2 am, while he was walking towards his house after completing his political assignments, he saw the accused coming from the opposite side in a hurry. He identified the accused in the light emanating from the electric post and when he asked the accused as to where he was going at that time, he ran away. At that time, the accused was very nervous. Thereafter, when he walked ahead, he saw the incident and the fire force personnel, police and others dousing fire in the house of the deceased. He also saw Seena being taken to the hospital and the charred body of Kunjipathu. He stated that the accused had left the place after completing the house construction of Ummer and that the accused was very close to both the deceased. He