Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 14602
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, G. GIRISH, JJ
JAYAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.A 1095/2016
SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU (SR.), SRI.C.JAYAKIRAN, SRI.V.C.SARATH, SRUTHY K K, SRI.G.SUDHEER THURAVOOR, SRI.M.P.MADHAVANKUTTY
The court affirmed that minor discrepancies in eyewitness accounts do not undermine the overall credibility of the prosecution's case, especially when a common object among the accused is established.
Headnote:
[Murder] - [Conviction for Murder and Conspiracy] - [IPC Sections: 143, 147, 148, 120B, 302, 302 r/w 149] - [The court upheld the conviction of the accused for murder and conspiracy, emphasizing the sufficiency of eyewitness testimony, the presence of a common object among the accused, and the credibility of the prosecution's evidence despite minor discrepancies and flaws in the investigation.]
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the murder of Shameer by a group of accused following a prior altercation. The prosecution alleged that the accused formed an unlawful assembly and conspired to kill Shameer, leading to his death from multiple injuries inflicted by various weapons.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the eyewitness accounts credible, despite minor inconsistencies, and concluded that the evidence sufficiently established the guilt of the accused under the relevant sections of the IPC, particularly focusing on the common object of the unlawful assembly.
Issues: Whether the evidence presented was sufficient to uphold the conviction of the accused for murder and conspiracy under the IPC, considering the alleged discrepancies in witness testimonies and the investigation process.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the presence of a common object among the accused, as well as the corroborative eyewitness testimony, justified the conviction under Sections 302 and 149 of the IPC, despite some investigative flaws.
Final Decision: The appeals were dismissed, confirming the conviction and sentence of the accused.
Raja Vijayaraghavan, J. These appeals have been preferred challenging the finding of guilt, conviction and sentence passed by the I Additional Sessions Judge, Thrissur in S.C.No. 718 of 2008. In the above case, nine persons were indicted for having committed offences punishable under Sections 143 , 147, 148, 120B, 302 and 302 r/w. Section 149 of the IPC .
2. Short facts: The deceased in this case is one Shameer. In December 2005, an altercation occurred between Shameer and Jayan, the first accused. Jayan was found drinking alcohol in public, which Shameer allegedly objected to, leading to a confrontation. Shameer is said to have hit Jayan on the head with a bottle, causing injuries. As a result, Jayan harboured animosity towards Shameer. The prosecution alleges that the accused Nos. 2 to 7, who are close friends and associates of Jayan, gathered in front of the compound of an unoccupied house belonging to Alappatil Babu and conspired to murder Shameer. Following this conspiracy, the accused Nos. 1 to 7, allegedly formed anunlawfulassembly,andarmedthemselveswithdeadlyweapons, including a chopper and iron pipes, lay in wait in front of a house owned by one Madhavan, located at Door No. TC15/342. When Shameer arrived at the spot, unaware of the presence of the accused, they allegedly attacked him and inflicted multiple injuries. It is alleged that the first accused cut Shameer with a chopper, while the third and fourth accused attacked him with iron pipes. The chopper was then handed over to the second accused, who also inflicted injuries with it. The accused Nos. 6 and 7 used MO1 to MO3 weapons, handed over to them by the accused Nos. 1 to 3, and went on to inflict injuries. As many as 57 injuries were sustained by the deceased. The 5 th accused stood a bit further away guarding the place and did not inflict any injuries. When the prosecution witnesses, cited as PWs 2, 3, and 4, arrived at the scene, the accused threatened them and later fled. The first informant, the nephew of the deceased, also came to the scene. The injured Shameer was transported to Jubilee Mission Hospital, Thrissur in a police jeep., which came to the spot, on receiving information about the incident. Upon arrival, the doctor found him gasping, but there was no pulse or blood pressure. Shameer was pronounced dead at 10:15 p.m. on the same day.
3. Registration of the crime and investigation: After Shameer was pronounced dead, PW1 went to the Mannuthy PoliceStationandlodgedtheFirstInformationStatement (Ext.P1) at 2:00 a.m. on 15.05.2016, based on which the FIR (Ext.P9) was registered by PW.15, Sub Inspector of police, Mannuthy, under Sections 143 , 147, 148, 120B, and 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC . Ext.P2 inquest was prepared on 15.5.2016. The accused Nos. 1 to 8 were apprehended at 10:30 a.m. on the same day, and the 9th accused was apprehended on 01.06.2016. The accused was obtained in police custody and based on the information furnished, the clothes worn by accused Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 6 were recovered. PW11, a Police Surgeon attached to the Government Medical College, Thrissur, conducted the autopsy and issued a post-mortem certificate (Ext.P6). In the course of the investigation, it was revealed that the accused Nos. 8 and 9 harboured accused Nos. 1 to 7 and they were included in the array of the accused. The initial investigation was conducted by PW16, and it was later taken over by PW17, who completed the investigation and laid the final report before the Judicial First Class Magistrate (JFCM) - III Thrissur.
4. Proceedings before the Court: After complying with the procedure, the Judicial First Class Magistrate (JFCM) - III Thrissur committed the case to the Court of Sessions, Thrissur. After hearing both sides, the learned Sessions Judge framed charges under Sections 143 , 147, 148, 120B, 302, and 302 r/w. Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code . The accused pleaded not guilty to the charges and claimed to be tried. Accused Nos. 8 and 9
