When a conviction rests solely on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a flawless chain of events excluding all innocence hypotheses. Discrepancies in recovery and lack of documentation regarding stolen property create reasonable doubt, warranting acquittal.

JUDGMENT :

N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.

The appellant has assailed the judgment passed by the Additional District, FTC, Theni in SC No.59/2019 dated 24.01.2024 convicting and sentencing the appellant in the following manner:

The sentences are ordered to run concurrently.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the deceased used to work in Kerala as a daily wage labour. The appellant used to pick up daily wage workers in a Jeep while transporting them to Kerala thereby the deceased got acquainted with the appellant. Taking advantage of this relationship, in the year 2010, the appellant borrowed a sum of Rs.40,000/- from the deceased and executed a promissory note to repay back the amount with interest. The appellant did not repay the said amount in spite of the repeated demand and request made by the deceased. It is alleged that the appellant started threatening the deceased and therefore, there was animosity between the appellant and the deceased. It is alleged that between 03.08.2018 and 05.08.2018, the deceased was alone in the house and the appellant went to the house of the deceased and there was a quarrel, since the appellant refused to repay back the money. The appellant is said to have assaulted the deceased with hands and dashed her head in the iron cot. He thereafter strangulated and suffocated the deceased with a pillow on the face. The same resulted in the demise of the deceased. Thereafter the appellant is said to have stolen gold chains, ear rings and other gold ornaments weighing 69.500 gms.

2.1. On 05.08.2018, when PW1, who is the sister of the deceased, went to the house of the deceased, the house was locked from outside and there was no sound of the deceased. Hence, with the help of PW2, who is the brother-in-law of the deceased and PW3, who is also a relative, the lock was dismantled with axa-blade (MO2) and on opening the door, they saw the deceased lying in a pool of blood.

3. PW1 gave a complaint (Ex.P1) to the Inspector of Police, Thevaram Police Station, based on which, an FIR in Crime No.226/2018 (Ex.P15) was registered for offence under Section 302 IPC.

4. The investigation was taken over by PW16 and she went to the scene of crime and prepared the observation mahazar (Ex.P16) and rough sketch (Ex.P17). She also recovered MO1, MO2, MO4, MO12 to MO15 from the scene of crime under recovery mahazar (Ex.P18). The inquest was made on the dead body of the deceased and the inquest report was prepared (Ex.P19) in the presence of the panchayatdars. The dead body was sent for postmortem and the postmortem was conducted by the Doctor PW15, who prepared the postmortem report Ex.P13, in which, the following injuries were recorded:

“The following ante mortem injuries were noted over the body:

1.Laceration of size 1 cms x 0.75 cm x 0.5 cm seen on right side forehead;

2.Laceration of size 2 cms x 1 cm x 1 cm seen on right eyebrow.

3.Black coloured contusion of size 30 cms x 22 cms seen over the both side front of chest.

4.Black coloured contusion of size 10 cms x 6 cms seen on front and sides of the neck.

5.Black coloured contusion of size 5 cms x 4 cms seen on back of neck.

6.On bloodless dissection of the neck:

Extravassation of blood with clots noted over the underlying neck muscles. Larynx and trachea – contain bloodstained mucous; the fracture of left side greater horn of