The court upheld the conviction for murder based on reliable testimony and a dying declaration while acquitting the appellant of trespass due to co-ownership of property, emphasizing the admissibility of dying declarations under the Indian Evidence Act.

JUDGMENT :

K. V. Jayakumar, J.

This Criminal Appeal is preferred by the accused No.1 in S.C. No.963/2017 on the files of the Additional District and Sessions Court-VI, Kollam, dated 30.10.2019. The appellant herein, along with three other accused, stood trial before the Sessions Court for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 302, 201, and 34 of the IPC. The learned Sessions Judge found the appellant guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 447 and 302 IPC. However, the trial court acquitted accused Nos. 2 and 3 of all the charges. Accused No.4 (Sadasivan) died at the crime stage itself. The trial court acquitted the appellant/accused No.1 for the offence punishable under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The learned Sessions Judge sentenced the appellant to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-for the offence punishable under section 302 of the IPC. He was also sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 447 of the IPC.

3. Impugning the judgment, the appellant preferred this criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of the Cr.PC.

Prosecution Case:

4. Accused No. 2, Bindhu, is the wife of the accused No.1, Babu (appellant). Accused Nos. 3 and 4 are the mother and father of accused No.2, Bindhu, respectively. The deceased Lalitha is the sister of Sadasivan, accused No.4. The prosecution alleges that the relationship between the deceased Lalitha and her brother Sadasivan was strained due to a property dispute. Their ancestral property remained undivided, and no partition was effected.

5. The prosecution alleges that, on the fateful day on 21.02.2014, accused Nos. 2 and 3 trespassed into the property of the deceased Lalitha situated at Mukalumthara and picked up a quarrel. Lalitha restrained accused Nos. 2 and 3 from passing through her property. In the meantime, appellant also trespassed into the property of the deceased with a spade and in furtherance of the common intention of all the accused, at about 12 noon, appellant inflicted cut injuries on Lalitha’s head with MO-1, spade, causing fracture to her skull, and she fell down.Thereafter, appellant hit Lalitha on her chest with the spade handle.

6. The deceased Lalitha was taken to the Taluk Hospital, Adoor, by her son, Liju (PW3), accused No.4, and PW2 (Ravi). Since the injuries caused to the deceased were serious, she was referred to the Medical College, Kottayam, for better treatment. The deceased succumbed to the injuries on 04.03.2014, while undergoing treatment at Medical College Hospital, Kottayam.

7. The FIS was lodged by PW3 (Liju), son of the deceased on23.02.2014 at about 3.00 pm. On the basis of the information, PW13 registered Ext.P7 FIR and prepared Ext.P8 scene mahazar. PW15 (Mohandas), the Circle Inspector of Police, Sasthamkotta, took up the investigation on 24.02.2014. He arrested accused Nos. 1 and 4 on that day itself and recorded the confession statement of accused No.1(Babu). On the basis of the disclosure statement made by the appellant, he recovered MO1 spade ( ) from the firewood shed situated on the eastern side of the house of Sudharmani. Ext.P2(a) is the relevant portion of the disclosure statement.

8. PW16, the Circle Inspector of Police, took up the investigation on24.02.2014 and prepared Ext.P6 Inquest Report in the presence of the witnesses on 04.03.2014 from the Medical College Hospital, Kottayam. He filed Ext.P14 report incorporating Section 302 IPC. After completing the investigation final report was laid before court.

9. PW16 arrested accused Nos. 2 and 3 in the pr