IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Raja Vijayaraghavan V, K. V. Jayakumar, JJ.
Anandu And Ors. – Petitioners
Versus
State of Kerala, Represented By Public Prosecutor – Respondent
CRL.A No. 15 of 2019, CRL.A No. 95 of 2019, CRL.A No. 92 of 2019
Decided On : 10-07-2025
(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, and 302 r/w 149 - Criminal appeals against convictions for murder and related offences - The trial court convicted all appellants, sentencing them to life imprisonment for murder and varying terms for related offences - Accused formed unlawful assembly and committed violence leading to death of the victim. (Paras 1 - 2 , 29-30, 80)
(B) Unlawful Assembly - Definition and implications - The Court noted the legal definition of 'unlawful assembly' under IPC, emphasizing vicarious liability under Section 149 applicable to all members - Presence of accused in assembly was sufficient for conviction. (Paras 73 - 80 )
Facts of the case:
Appellants accused on 11.03.2010 attacked the victim Sarath and his friends due to a prior dispute regarding eve-teasing - Multiple witnesses corroborated the violent acts leading to Sarath's death from stab wounds inflicted by the accused using a dagger.
Findings of Court:
The prosecution established guilt beyond reasonable doubt through eyewitness testimony and circumstantial evidence - The court affirmed the trial court's conclusions on the accused's roles and actions during the incident.
Issues: The court addressed the credibility of eyewitnesses, the assessment of motive, and the implications of the presence of accused within an unlawful assembly.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reiterated that the evidence and the presence of accused in an unlawful assembly are sufficient to warrant a conviction for the crimes committed by other members in furtherance of a common object.
Result: Appeals dismissed; conviction and sentencing upheld.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appellants found guilty and sentenced. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. prosecution narrative and evidence collection. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. arguments regarding prosecution's failure to establish motive. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. evaluation of eyewitness credibility and evidence. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34) |
| 5. confirmation of trial court's findings of guilt. (Para 79 , 80) |
JUDGMENT :
K.V. JAYAKUMAR, J.
These criminal appeals are preferred impugning the judgment of the Additional Sessions Court-II, Kollam, in S.C.No. 955 of 2014. The appellant in Crl.A.No.92 of 2019 is the 1st accused. The appellants in Crl.A.No.15 of 2019 are accused Nos. 2, 4 and 5. The appellant in Crl.A.No.95 of 2019 is the 3rd accused. The appellants/accused Nos. 1 to 5 faced the trial before the Sessions Court, Kollam for the offences punishable under Sections 143 , 147, 148, 341, 323 & 302 r/w 149 of the Indian Penal Code .
2. The learned Sessions Judge found the appellants guilty, convicted and sentenced them. Accused Nos. 1 to 5 were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.25,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of 3 months each, for the offence under Section 302 r/w 149 of IPC . They were also sentenced to undergo imprisonment for various terms under Sections 143 , 147, 148, 341, 323 r/w 149 of IPC . However, accused No.1 was acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 147 IPC and accused Nos.2 to 5 were acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 148 IPC .
Prosecution case
3. The prosecution alleges that on 11.03.2010 at about 8.45 p.m., accused Nos. 1 to 5 formed themselves into an unlawful assembly armed with a dagger and in furtherance of the common object of that assembly, intercepted the motorcycle ridden by the deceased Sarath at Mythri Junction of Mundakkal Village, on the Thumpara- Amruthakulam public road, along with PW12, Anu Joseph Kuruvila and PW17, Vignesh as pillion riders, and attacked them. The prosecution further alleges that when accused No.1, Immanuel @ Tony, attempted to inflict a stab injury on PW12, the deceased swerved to obviate the attempt of stab. The deflected dagger happened to hit on the right thigh of accused No.1, whereby he sustained injury. In the meanwhile, accused No.1 chased Sarath and repeatedly stabbed him in the back, as a result of which he succumbed to the injuries. It is further alleged that all the appellants inflicted blows on the deceased Sarath, PW12, and PW17, and thereby they alleged to have committed the offences aforementioned. The motive alleged by the prosecution is that PW15, Kuruvila John, the cousin of PW12, had eve-teased PW1 (Reshma) while she was returning to her home riding a bicycle.
Registration of the crime and investigation
4. PW13, Anoop Kumar, lodged Ext.P11 FIS before PW10, Sub-Inspector of Kollam East Police Station. On the basis of Ext.P11 FIS, PW10 registered Ext.P9 FIR in crime No.439 of 2010 at 11 p.m. on 11.03.2010.
5. On 12.03.2010, PW18, Sri. S. Vijayan, Circle Inspector, took up the investigation. He conducted the inquest at about 8.30 a.m. and prepared Ext.P1, Inquest Report, in the presence of the witnesses. He seized four material objects during the inquest. Thereafter, he prepared Ext.P2, Scene Mahazar, in the presence of the witnesses. The materials seized at the time of inquest were forwarded to the Court. The samples collected from the place of occurrence were forwarded to the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) as per Ext.P15, forwarding note. On the same day, he arrested accused Nos.1 to 5 after preparing the arrest memo, Inspection memo and arrest intimation.
6. PW18 has seized two mobile phones from accused No. 3. After preparing Ext.P6, Inventory Mahazar, those mobile phones were forwarded to the Court as per Ext.P24, property list. He questioned accused No.1 while in police custody and recorded his confession. On the basis of the disclosure statement, h
Ramanand @ Nandlal Bharti v. State of Uttar Pradesh
Aslam Alias Imran v. State of Madhya Pradesh
Sarwan Singh and Others v. State of Punjab
State of U.P. v. Ballabh Das and Others
Conviction for murder upheld based on unlawful assembly doctrine; presence in assembly sufficient for accountability under Section 149 IPC.
Presence in an unlawful assembly suffices for liability, affirming that minor discrepancies in testimonies do not negate the prosecution's case.
The court affirmed the conviction for murder based on the established common object of the unlawful assembly, supported by credible witness testimonies and medical evidence.
(1) Murder – Evidence of eye-witness should be of very sterling quality and calibre and it should not only instil confidence in court to accept the same but it should also be a version of such nature....
Point of law : Object of the proceedings under Section 174 Cr.P.C. is merely to ascertain whether a person died under suspicious circumstances or met with an unnatural death and, if so, what was its ....
The prosecution must establish a common object for unlawful assembly under Section 149 IPC; absence of motive and specific allegations can lead to acquittal.
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.