IMPORTANT POINT
The conviction for murder was upheld based on strong circumstantial evidence and the 'last seen together' doctrine, establishing the appellant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

JUDGMENT :

P. SAM KOSHY, J.

1. The instant is an appeal under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. filed by the appellant-accused challenging the judgment of conviction dated 28.04.2016 in Sessions Case No. 245 of 2015 passed by the Judge, XVI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad.

2. Heard Mr. Mettu Govardhan Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State.

3. Vide the impugned judgment, the Trial Court had found the appellant guilty for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’) and upon convicting the appellant, sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of four (04) months.

4. The case of the prosecution, as per the charge-sheet, is that on 29.01.2014 at 00:30 hours, PW-1 (R. Anil Kumar) who is father of the Master R. Yashraj Kumar (hereinafter, the ‘deceased’) lodged a initial complaint at Mangalhat Police Station, Hyderabad, contending that the deceased was missing since 28.01.2014 who went out from the house for playing and did not return to home. He provided a detailed description of his son, including his height, facial features and the clothes he was wearing (school uniform with a check shirt and blue Necker). PW-1 mentioned that he along with his relatives had searched for the deceased at all possible places but could not find him. Later, on 29.01.2014 at 08:00 hours, PW-1 submitted an additional complaint stating that his neighbors had informed him that on 28.01.2014, at about 18:00 hours, the appellant who was the distant relative of PW-1 had forcibly taken away the deceased while he was playing in front of his house. The appellant then took the deceased to Peeram Cheru Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, where the appellant brutally murdered him by strangling with an electrical wire and smashing the deceased head with a stone. To conceal the crime, the appellant attempted to disfigure the body using petrol. The motive for the crime was twofold: (i) to take revenge on the deceased’s mother for insulting the appellant and (ii) to extort ransom money from the deceased’s parents.

5. As per prosecution, after thorough investigation by the police authorities it was revealed that the appellant kidnapped the deceased from outside his home while playing and the appellant also had a history of financial troubles, having defaulted on motorcycle loan repayments and addicted to toddy. The appellant had previous conflicts with deceased’s family particularly the deceased’s mother (LW-2) who had insulted him. The appellant meticulously planned the crime by luring the deceased with chocolates and separating him from another child and he then took the deceased on a journey by purchasing items for the murder including electrical wire, petrol and a matchbox. The appellant even stopped at a chat bhandar and toddy compound during this time, showing a chilling level of calculation. Eventually, the appellant took the boy to an isolated area in Peeram Cheru Village, and strangulated the deceased with the electrical wire and smashed his head with a stone. In an attempt to conceal the crime and prevent identification, he tried to burn the body using petrol. The next morning body was discovered by a passer-by PW-10 (Naveen Kumar) during his morning walk. This led to the initial registration of the case under Sections 302 and 201 IPC at Narsingi Police Station. Subsequently, after post-mortem examination it was held that the cause of death of the deceased as “Ligature Strangulation associated with Head Injury.”

6. The police authorities registered the complaint as Cr. No. 27 of 2014 for the offence under Section 302 of IPC. During the course of investigation, the appellant was apprehended on 05.02.2014 and during interrogation he confessed the crime. This case was original