Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 32790
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V &
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.GIRISH TH TUESDAY, THE 8 DAY OF OCTOBER 2024 / 16TH ASWINA, 1946 CRL.A NO. 1137 OF 2022 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 28.02.2018 IN SC NO.447 OF 2013 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT - IV, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM APPELLANT/SOLE ACCUSED:
ASHOKAN, AGED 58 YEARSM S/O RAKSHADHARAN; RESIDING AT: VAYALIL VEEDU, H.NO.VMC V/129, KANJIRAMVILAKOM, KARUNILAKKODE, VARKALA DESOM, VARKALA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695024 BY ADVS.
R.RAJESH (VARKALA)
M.KIRANLAL MANU RAMACHANDRAN T.S.SARATH SAMEER M NAIR GEETHU KRISHNAN SAILAKSHMI MENON RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT-STATE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SMT. NEEMA THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 08.10.2024, ALONG WITH CRL.APPEAL NO. 807 OF 2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V &
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.GIRISH TH TUESDAY, THE 8 DAY OF OCTOBER 2024 / 16TH ASWINA, 1946 CRL.A NO. 807 OF 2022 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 28.02.2018 IN SC NO.447 OF 2013 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT - IV, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM APPELLANT/ACCUSED:
ASOKAN (C-2504)
AGED 57 YEARS, S/O.RAKSHADHARAN, CENTRAL PRISON, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THROUGH THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, POOJAPPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, WAS RESIDING AT VAYALIL VEEDU, H.NO.VMC V/129, KANJIRAMVILAKOM, KARUNILAKKODE, VARKALA DESOM, VARKALA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695024 RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ADV. THOMAS SABU VADAKEKUT (STATE BRIEF)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.10.2024, ALONG WITH CRL.A.1137/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
R.RAJESH (VARKALA), M.KIRANLAL, MANU RAMACHANDRAN, T.S.SARATH, SAMEER M NAIR, GEETHU KRISHNAN, SAILAKSHMI MENON
The court established that premeditated actions leading to fatal injuries negate claims of provocation or self-defense under IPC Section 300.
Headnote:
Criminal Law - Murder - IPC Sections 302, 323, 324, 447 - The court upheld the conviction for murder, emphasizing the premeditated nature of the attack and the absence of provocation, interpreting the relevant sections to affirm the gravity of the offenses committed.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for murdering Soman after a series of altercations stemming from ongoing disputes between the families. The appellant trespassed into the deceased's property, assaulted his wife, and later returned armed with a knife, fatally stabbing Soman.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the prosecution's evidence credible, particularly the testimonies of eyewitnesses, and concluded that the appellant acted with premeditation and malice, thus affirming the conviction for murder and related offenses.
Issues: Whether the appellant's actions constituted murder under Section 302 IPC, and whether he was entitled to any exceptions under Section 300 IPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appellant's premeditated attack with a deadly weapon on an unarmed victim, following a prior altercation, did not qualify for exceptions under Section 300 IPC, affirming the conviction for murder.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, upholding the conviction and sentence of the appellant.
JUDGMENT
Raja Vijayaraghavan, J.
Crl. Appeal No. 1137 of 2022 has been preferred by the appellant challenging the finding of guilt, conviction, and sentence passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Thiruvananthapuram, in S.C.No. 447 of 2013. In the above case, the appellant was indicted for having committed offences punishable under Sections 447 , 323, 324, and 302 of the IPC . It appears that before the filing of the above appeal, a Jail Petition was filed by the appellant through the Superintendent, Central Prison and Correctional Home, Poojappura, Thiruvananthapuram, and on its basis Crl. Appeal. No. 807 of 2021 was filed by the legal aid counsel. As the appellant has filed Crl. Appeal No. 1137 of 2022 through the counsel of his choice, the said appeal can be heard and disposed of.
The facts in brief as per the prosecution:
2. The appellant, along with his family consisting of his aged father, wife, and two daughters, resided at Karunilakkodu. The deceased, Soman, lived on the southern side of the appellant's house with his wife, Geetha (PW2), and their three daughters. The appellant's property is situated at a higher elevation, separated from Soman's by a short laterite wall running east to west. According to the prosecution, the appellant used to persistently misbehave with PW2 and her children, and this led to a seriously strained relationship between the families. The prosecution alleges that on May 14, 2006, at around 10 a.m., the accused, wearing only a bath towel (Thorth), committed criminal trespass by entering the courtyard of the deceased's house. An altercation ensued, during which Soman and his wife confronted the accused for trespassing and verbally abusing them. The accused followed Geetha and after slapping her on her face, kicked her, causing her to fall. When Soman intervened, a physical skirmish broke out between him and the accused. This incident was witnessed by Babu, Ani (PW11), and Kuttappan (PW10), who were working nearby in Thankamma’s house. They intervened and separated the two men. The accused then returned to his house, changed into a lungi, tied a bath towel around his waist, and came back armed with a knife. Another tussle ensued between the accused and the deceased. Geetha (PW2) and their daughter Sini (PW3) tried to intervene and cried for help. Hearing their cries, Anandan (PW1), who was working nearby, rushed to the scene and attempted to break up the fight. It is alleged that the appellant then took out the knife and inflicted multiple stab wounds on Soman's chest and neck. Anandan also sustained minor injuries in the course of the transaction. As neighbors gathered hearing the commotion, the appellant is taken to have heels, carrying the knife with him. Though Soman was rushed to the Government Hospital, Varkala, he was declared dead on arrival. The appellant is alleged to have made an attempt to leave the place with his aged father. However, his attempt was foiled when the neighbours who had assembled there caught him when he fell down and tied him to a nearby coconut tree.
Registration of Crime:
3. On the same day, Anandan approached the police and gave information at 12 noon, based on which, Crime No. 283/2006 was registered under Sections 447 , 323, 324 and 302 of the IPC .
Investigation:
4. The investigation was taken over by PW20 on May 14, 2006. He received information that the appellant had been apprehended by local residents and, based on this information, arrived at the scene to take the accused into custody. Ext.P12, the inquest report, was subsequently prepared, documenting the injuries found on the body, which was then sent for autopsy. On the same day, Ext.P2, the scene mahazar, was drawn up, and objects found at the crime scene were seized. The arrest of the accused was formally recorded at 7:15 p.m. on the same day, as per Ext.P15 arrest memo. Based on the disclosure statement provided by the accused, MO4 (the knife) and MO2 (the kaili worn by the accused at the time
