The prosecution must establish a complete chain of evidence in circumstantial cases; failure to produce key evidence leads to reasonable doubt and potential acquittal.

COMMON JUDGMENT

P.V.BALAKRISHNAN, J

Criminal Appeal No.704/2018 is filed by the 1st accused and Criminal Appeal No.1133/2018 is filed by the 2nd accused, challenging their conviction and sentence imposed under Sections 120B and 302 IPC in S.C.No.111/2011 by the Special Court (SPE/CBI)-I, Ernakulam.

The Prosecution Case:

2. The accused, five in number, entered into a criminal conspiracy to exterminate deceased Balakrishnan, who had married the daughter of the 5th accused Abubacker Haji without the consent of their family. Abubacker Haji was opposed to the marriage of his daughter Rasina with the deceased Balakrishnan and he was of the view that it brought dishonour to his family and community at large. Abubacker Haji decided to eliminate Balakrishnan once and for all and he engaged the first accused for the same. The first accused befriended Balakrishnan and with the help of the approver Abdul Hameed, got in touch with the second accused, who agreed to help the first accused for monetary consideration. Accordingly, at 10.30 pm on 18.09.2001, the first and second accused committed murder of the said Balakrishnan by stabbing him with a knife on his neck and body inside a Maruti car bearing registration No.CTA-2697 at the public road near Muhiyudheen Masjid, Pulikkunnu, Kasaragod. The third accused was one of the conspirators, who had arranged a party on 1.08.2001, which was attended by the first accused wherein the third accused assured all help to him. The fourth accused harboured the first accused in his house on the night of 18.09.2001 and thereafter, helped him to escape to Mangalore. Hence, the prosecution alleged that the accused had committed the offences punishable under Sections 120B r/w302 IPC and Section 212 of .

Proceedings in the Trial Court:

3. From the side of the prosecution, PWs1 to 65 were marked and Exts.P1 to 104 and MO1 to MO12 were marked. From the side of the accused, D1 to D18 were marked through the prosecution witnesses. Exts.C1 and C1(b) were also marked as court exhibits. When the accused were examined under Section 313 Cr.PC, they denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing against them in evidence and contended that they were innocent. From the side of the accused, DW1 to DW8 were examined and Exts.D19 and D20 were marked. The Trial Court, on an appreciation of the evidence on record and after hearing both sides, found that the first and the second accused guilty of committing the offence punishable under Section 120B r/w 302 IPC and convicted them thereunder. It also found that accused Nos.3 to 5 were not guilty of the offences alleged against them and they were acquitted. The Trial Court sentenced the 1st and 2nd accused to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence under and imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- each for the offence under Section 302 . In case of default, the accused were ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years.

A compendium of the prosecution evidence:

4. PW1 is the person who lodged Exts.P1 FIS. He deposed that, while he was working as Imam in Muhiyudheen Masjid, on 18.09.2001 at about 10.30 pm, he heard repeated cries and when he opened the door, he saw a person soaked in blood coming running. That person cried for help and requested him to take him to a hospital. He called the persons residing nearby, and one Shamsu, Asharaf, Ayyappan, Muhammed Kutti and Sakeer Husain came there. When he asked the victim as to who had stabbed him, he told him it was his friend Iqbal. The President and Secretary of the Mosque, who had come ther