The court reaffirmed that circumstantial evidence must connect all links beyond reasonable doubt and that possession of stolen items without explanation infers guilt.

JUDGMENT :

C. KUMARAPPAN, J.

The instant criminal appeals have arisen against the order of conviction passed by the learned III Additional Sessions Judge, Puducherry, in S.C. No. 3 of 2015, dated 13.03.2019.

2. Originally, there were three accused: the appellant in Crl.A.No.191 of 2019, viz., Silambarasan is the first accused, and the appellant in Crl.A.No.357 of 2019, viz., Prasath is the second accused. The third accused, Venkatesh though filed a Criminal Appeal in Crl.A.No.564 of 2019, since he died during pendency of this appeal, the said Criminal Appeal was dismissed as abated, vide order dated 11.09.2024. Both these appeals arise from S.C. No. 3 of 2015 and hence, we deem it appropriate to dispose the two pending appeals together by way of a common judgment.

3. For the sake of convenience, we may refer to the respective appellants according to their the litigative status mentioned before the Trial Court.

4. While flittering the facts, the facts which are necessary for disposal of the appeals are stated herein below:-

(a) It was between 13.30 and 15.30 hours on 06.06.2014, PW1/Bubesh Anand shocked as his phone call was not attended by his mother [deceased] between 1.30 p.m and 2.00 p.m. Then, he (PW1) rushed to the house to meet his mother [deceased] at 3.30 p.m along with his wife (PW3). But his mother was lying unconscious, with her hands tied, and mouth taped. Hence, PW1 took his mother [deceased] to Kathirgamam Indira Gandhi Hospital, where she was declared dead. While proceeding to the hospital, PW1 also called PW5, a relative, who joined him at the hospital.

(b) Thereafter, both PW1 and PW5 went to Mettupalayam Police Station and gave Ex.P1, the complaint to PW20, S. Balamurugan, who registered an FIR in Crime No. 66 of 2014 at about 17:00 hours on the same day. On receiving the copy of the FIR, (PW23), the Investigating Officer proceeded to Kathirgamam Indira Gandhi Hospital, where the deceased's body was kept. There, he made arrangements to take photographs and prepared an observation mahazar and rough sketch, in the presence of Parathasarthy (PW6) and Kuppusamy. As a part of investigation, he recovered the articles lying at the scene of occurrence in the presence of the same witnesses.

(c) After recording statements from PW1/Bubesh Anand, PW3/Ramya, PW2/Suganandhan, and the first accused/Silambarasan, he conducted the inquest on the deceased's body on 07.06.2014. This was carried out in the presence of Sathya Seelan (PW7), Arumugam, Sarangapani, and Andal. Following this, arrangements were made for the post-mortem examination. He also recorded additional statements from PW1/Bubesh Anand, PW2/Suganandhan, PW3/Ramya, PW4/Lakshmi, PW6/Parthasarathy, Rajan, and Kuppusamy. The body was then handed over to the deceased's family on 08.06.2014 and arrangements were made to recover the deceased's dress materials.

(d) On 09.06.2014, he recorded statements from the Doctor C. Dhatchayani, who first attended the deceased, and another witness, PW5/Dhanraj Mohan. Based on PW4/Lakshmi's statement, about the presence of the accused at the scene of occurrence at 13.3