Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JOBIN SEBASTIAN, JJ
Devarajan @ Ponnappaswamy S/o.soundarraj – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
P.B.Suresh Kumar, J.
The sole accused in S.C.No.453 of 2015 on the files of the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge-III, Thodupuzha, is the appellant. He stands convicted and sentenced for having committed the murder of one Ponnamma.
2. A temple was under the ownership of Ponnamma and she was also the priestess of the said temple. Ponnamma, though married, was widowed and thereafter, was residing in the house adjoining the temple premises. The appellant was a person who provided assistance to Ponnamma in the temple and he was also residing in the same house. On 24.08.2011, Mohanan, one of the brothers of Ponnamma informed Nedumkandam police that Ponnamma is lying dead in the bedroom of her house with some injuries on her body. A case was registered based on the said information and the investigation in the case revealed that at about 4.00 p.m. on 23.08.2011, when Ponnamma collapsed in her house on account of some ailment, the appellant smothered her to death using a folded saffron coloured dhoti. Final report was accordingly filed in the case.
3. On the appellant being committed to trial after his arrest, the Court of Session framed charge against him under Section 302 of
Circumstantial evidence can sustain a murder conviction if it is consistent with guilt and excludes all reasonable hypotheses of innocence.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, especially in cases of serious offenses like murder.
Section 106 of Indian Evidence Act provides that when any fact is especially within knowledge of any person, burden of proving that fact is upon him.
The prosecution must establish a complete chain of evidence beyond reasonable doubt for a conviction, especially in circumstantial cases.
The last seen together theory alone is insufficient for conviction; a complete chain of circumstantial evidence must exclude all reasonable hypotheses of innocence.
If a person is last seen with the deceased, in that case regarding the death of the deceased, he must offer an explanation which is probable and satisfactory. If he does so, then it will be held that....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
