The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of reliable eyewitness identification, the admissibility of recovery evidence, and the obligation to disclose crucial reports in criminal cases.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Criminal Appeals filed under Section 374(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to call for the records in S.C.No.114 of 2009, on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Hosur dated 23.01.2020 and set aside the judgment dated 23.01.2020.)

Common Judgment:

Sunder Mohan, J.

1. These appeals have been filed by Accused Nos.2, 3, 4 and 5, challenging the conviction and sentence imposed upon them vide judgment dated 23.01.2020 in S.C.No.114 of 2009, on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Hosur.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the trial Court.

3.(i) The case of the prosecution is that on 30.01.2009 at about 4.00pm, the accused to commit robbery trespassed into the house of one Shakila Banu (the deceased), situated at Kalukondapalli Village near Hosur Thali Road; that A1 and A4 took the deceased to her bedroom and tied her in a chair and thereafter, gagged her mouth and her nose with a plaster, knowing fully well that it is likely to cause death; that A1 and A4 tied the hands of the deceased; that A2, A3 and A5 shared the common intention with A1 and A4 in the said offence; that all the accused thereafter took away the gold and silver articles and Rs.3,000/- cash from the cupboard of the deceased; and that since the mouth and nose of the deceased-Shakila Banu were plastered, she died due to suffocation.

(ii) It is the further case of the prosecution that PW1 and PW2, the daughters-in-law of the deceased were in the house when the alleged occurrence took place; that PW1 gave a complaint to the police at about 6.30pm on 30.01.2009; and that on the complaint marked as Ex.P1, PW11- Investigation Officer registered an FIR-Ex.P22.

(iii) The further prosecution case is that on 28.01.2009, two unknown persons came to the house of the deceased and represented that they were from HDFC Bank; that again, on 29.01.2009, four other persons came and asked for one 'Sevaal', and when the deceased told the accused that there was no one by the name 'Sevaal' in the house, they left the place; and that all the above mentioned six persons joined together and came on the fateful day i.e., 30.01.2009 to the house of the deceased.

(iv) On receipt of the complaint, PW11, took up the investigation, and went to the scene of the occurrence, prepared the observation mahazar [Ex.P2] and the rough sketch [Ex.P25], and examined the witnesses. Since the witnesses were not conversant with Tamil language, he took the help of constable Madheshan [PW7] to translate the statements of the witnesses; that on 31.01.2009, PW11 went to Hosur Government Hospital, where the body of the deceased was kept and conducted an inquest in the presence of witnesses, and prepared the inquest report [Ex.P26]. Thereafter, PW11 is said to have made a request to conduct postmortem on 31.01.2009 and sent the body for postmortem through PW8-Constable. He examined further witnesses and seized the dress of the deceased [M.O.34 to M.O.37] on 31.01.2009.

(iv) PW11, while he was in search of the accused in the instant case, apprehended A1 and A6 at Nallur check post on suspicion. A1 and A6 had given a confession statement, and pursuant to the confession statement of A1, the investigation officer seized the knife [M.O.3], under the seizure mahazar [Ex.P6] on 26.02.2009 at 7.30pm. The admissible portion of the confession of A1 is marked as Ex.P4.

(v) Pursuant to the confession of A6, PW11 seized the motorcycle Yamaha RX 100 bearing Regn.No.KA35H3155 [M.O.5] and a knife [M.O.4] under the seizure mahazar (Ex.P7) on 26.02.2009 at 7.00pm. The admissible portion of the confession of A6 is marked as Ex.P5.

(vi) On 26.02.2009, at about 8.15pm, PW11 arrested A2-Manju, A3- Sunil @ Sunil Kumar and A4-R.Vinay.