IMPORTANT POINT
Conviction based solely on circumstantial evidence requires a complete and coherent chain of events that excludes all reasonable hypotheses of innocence.

JUDGMENT :

P. Sam Koshy, J.

This appeal was listed for consideration of I.A.No.1 of 2024 seeking suspension of sentence.

2. Taking into consideration the fact that the appeal is of the year 2017 and the appellant-accused has undergone 8 years and 18 days incarceration and also taking note of the fact that the conviction of the appellant was only on the circumstantial evidence, we thought it proper to decide the appeal itself on merits rather than deciding the application for suspension of sentence. Learned counsels appearing on both sides advanced their hearing, accordingly, we proceed to decide the appeal on merits.

3. The instant appeal has been filed assailing the Judgment of conviction dated 19.12.2016 passed by the learned VIII Additional District & Sessions Judge, Miryalaguda in S.C.No.620 of 2011. Vide the said impugned Judgment, the trial Court has found the appellant guilty for the offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code (for short “IPC”) for two counts, and for the offence under Section 364 of IPC for two counts. The accused has been sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for life along with fine of Rs.1,000/- on each count under Section 302 IPC, and for the offence under Section 364 of IPC, the appellant has been sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for seven (7) years with fine of Rs.1,000/- for each count with default stipulations for both the punishments.

4. As per the prosecution case, on 21.01.2009, PW1 lodged a written report before the Garidepally police station, which was registered as Crime No.5 of 2009, wherein, it was informed that two children born to PW1 and his wife-PW2 were found missing since 20.01.2009 after the school hours. There was a suspicion drawn against the present appellant in the missing of two children. Subsequently, on 22.01.2009, the police authorities in the course of search, found dead body of the minor-Swetha in the reservoir of the village and later on the dead body of the boy also was found in Nayakangudem tank.

5. Meanwhile, the statement of PW6-Bachalakuri Mattaiah was recorded on 22.01.2009, wherein, he has stated that the appellant-accused made an extra judicial confession before him in respect of killing of the two children. It was also confessed by the appellant-accused before PW6 that he had killed two children in order to develop intimacy with the mother (PW2-Nelapatla Anjamma) of two children. On the basis of statement of PW6 in respect of extra judicial confession made, the appellant herein was taken into custody wherein there was also a confession statement made by the appellant-accused. Meanwhile, the dead bodies recovered from the reservoir and the tank nearby, were sent for post-mortem. In the post mortem, the cause of death assigned by the Doctor who conducted post mortem was “asphyxia” due to drowning. The charge sheet was thereafter filed and the matter was put to trial before the VIII Additional District & Sessions Judge, Miryalaguda vide S.C.No.620 of 2001.

6. The prosecution in all examined 26 witnesses. Five (5) witnesses were examined on behalf of the defence. Thereafter, after recording of 313 Cr.P.C., statement of the accused, the impugned Judgment was delivered on 19.12.2016 holding the appellant-accused found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and also for the offence under Section 364 of IPC.

7. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant at the threshold itself contends that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, so as to hold the appellant guilty for the offence under Section 302 of IPC and also for the offence under Section 364 of IPC. The learned counsel contended that the entire conviction was based upon circumstantial evidence and that the circumstances relied upon by the trial Court was too week an evidence, to convict the present appellant or holding him guilty for the offence charged. According to him, the prosecution has failed in so far as collecting the entire