Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 67760
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P. B. Suresh Kumar, JOBIN SEBASTIAN, JJ
STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA – Appellant
Versus
RISHIKESH, S/O SURESH, MAROTTIKKAL HOUSE, THANNYAM VILLAGE, PERINGOTTUKARA DESAM – Respondent
CRL.A NO. 355 OF 2020 | CRA(V) NO. 631 OF 2017
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.S.U.NAZAR, SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
For the Respondents: SRI.RAFIQ P.M., SRI.S.RAJEEV, SRI.P.S.SREEDHARAN PILLAI, SRI.T.K.SANDEEP, SRI.ARJUN SREEDHAR, SRI.ARUN KRISHNA DHAN, SRI.ALEX ABRAHAM, SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU (SR.), SRI.M.REVIKRISHNAN, SRI.AJEESH K.SASI, SMT.SRUTHY N. BHAT, SRI.RAHUL SUNIL, SMT.SRUTHY K.K, SRI.SOHAIL AHAMMED HARRIS P.P., SMT.NANDITHA S., SRI.AARON ZACHARIAS BENNY, SRI.V.VINAY, SRI.M.S.ANEER, SRI.SARATH K.P., SRI.ANILKUMAR C.R., SRI.K.S.KIRAN KRISHNAN, SMT.DIPA V.
The appellate court may overturn an acquittal if the trial court's findings are grossly erroneous, and sufficient evidence exists to prove the accused's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 120B, 302, 324, 326, 307, 201, and 34 - Criminal conspiracy and murder - Appeals against acquittal of accused in murder case - The trial court acquitted all accused based on erroneous appreciation of evidence. The appellate court found sufficient evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt against accused 1 to 5 for murder and relevant charges. The evidence of eyewitnesses was corroborated by medical and forensic evidence, leading to conviction. (Paras 1-58)
(B) Acquittal - Principles governing - The appellate court may reverse an acquittal if there is gross perversity or patent illegality in the trial court's decision. (Paras 31-32)
(C) Evidence - Eyewitness testimony - Testimony of injured witnesses is generally reliable. The presence of the witnesses at the scene was affirmed by their injuries, and their identification of the accused was credible. (Paras 38-39)
(D) Sentencing - The court imposed life imprisonment on the convicted accused, considering their roles and circumstances. (Paras 1-4)
JUDGMENT :
P.B. Suresh Kumar, J.
These appeals arise from S.C.No.604 of 2015 on the files of the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge-III, Thrissur. There were 10 accused in the case and the Court of Session acquitted all. Crl.Appeal.No.355 of 2020 is preferred by the State and Crl.Appeal (V) No.631 of 2017 is preferred by one of the victims, challenging the acquittal of the accused.
2. Deepak, who succumbed to the injuries sustained in an occurrence that took place on 24.03.2015 was an office bearer of the political party, Janatha Dal United (JDU). He was running a ration shop at a place called Pazhuvil Centre. At about 8.30 p.m. on the relevant day, while Deepak was standing in front of the ration shop, four persons armed with deadly weapons appeared unexpectedly to that place and two among them attacked Deepak with the weapons carried by them. Although a few persons standing on the opposite side of the road rushed to the said spot and attempted to prevent further attack on Deepak, one of the assailants created a scene of terror and others attacked even the said persons and then fled from that place in a Maruti Omni Van. Even though Deepak and others viz, Sajeev, Stalin and Sunil who suffered injuries were taken to Elite Mission Hospital, Koorkenchery, Deepak died on the same day itself.
3. A statement was recorded by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Cherpu from Sajeev at 10.30 p.m. on the same day while he was undergoing treatment in the hospital and a case was registered at 11.30 p.m. on the basis of the information furnished by Sajeev under Sections 324 , 307 and 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code ( IPC ) and under Section 27 of the Arms Act . The case was in fact against four recognizable persons. The investigation in the case revealed that a few activists of the political party, Socialist Janatha Dal (SJD) attempted to murder the sixth accused namely, Sivadas on an earlier occasion and the sixth accused believed that Deepak was behind the attempt made on his life. It was also revealed that on account of the said reason, accused 1 to 10 hatched a conspiracy to commit the murder of Deepak, and it is in pursuance of that conspiracy, accused 1 to 5 came to the scene on the relevant day in a Maruti Omni Van bearing registration No.KL-08-N-7252 and accused 1 to 4 among them attacked Deepak and others, while fifth accused was remaining in the van and thereafter fled from the scene in the same van. The investigation also revealed that among accused 1 to 4, the second accused stabbed Deepak, with the knife carried by him, on the right side of his neck and also on his left hand and the third accused hacked Deepak with the sword carried by him, on his left hand. The investigation further revealed that three persons namely, Sajeev, Stalin and Sunil were then standing near the scene and it was they who attempted to prevent the attack on Deepak. The investigation further revealed that the second accused is the person who attacked Sajeev also by stabbing him on his back and the fourth accused is the person who hacked Stalin with the sword carried by him. The final report was accordingly filed against the accused alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 120B , 109, 201, 324, 326 , 307 and 302 read with and of the . It is alleged in the final report that the Maruti Omni Van in which accused 1 to 5 came to the scene of occurrence was one that was purchased by the sixth accused with the help of the seventh accused and the accused abandoned the said Van after the occurrence and proceeded further in a Santro Car bearing registration No.No.KL-14-G-4060. The allegation against accused 8 to 10 in the final report is that they collected from accused 1, 3 and 4 the swords used by them while they were switching vehicles near Kottangode Bridge and entrusted the same to the tenth accused. It was also alleged in the final report that the tenth accused, in turn, concealed the same in a river.
