The judgment highlights the necessity of a clear nexus in circumstantial evidence for convictions in murder cases.

COMMON JUDGMENT

DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.

and C.KUMARAPPAN,J.

The present Criminal Appeals are preferred by the Accused Nos.1 and

2 against the conviction and sentence rendered by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sivagangai in S.C.No.56 of 2014 vide judgment dated 28.04.2022.

2. The Trial Court, which has tried four accused for the offences under Section 120(b) r/w 302 IPC against all the four accused, Section 302 against A1 and A2, r/w 34 against A3 and A4 and r/w 120(b) and 114 against A4. After trial, the Trial Court has held that the prosecution was not able to prove the theory of conspiracy involving A3 and A4 and therefore, acquitted them. As against A1 and A2, the Trial Court held that the evidence of the prosecution is sufficient to hold them guilty for the offence under Section 120(b) r/w 302 and sentenced them to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.10,000/- each, in default, to undergo six months simple imprisonment. The Trial Court also found them guilty for the offence under simplicitor and sentenced them to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.10,000/-

each, in default, to undergo nine months simple imprisonment.

3. On considering the prosecution evidence, the Trial Court had culled out the incriminating evidence against A1 and A2 and has observed that it is a case of circumstantial evidence, wherein, the prosecution is able to prove the motive, which, according to the witnesses, a quarrel between A2, Ramkumar and Karthick, who was examined as P.W.7, both students of Alagappa University. They quarrelled about teasing a girl, who participated in the College Day festival. For the theory of last seen together, the Trial Court relied upon the evidence of P.W.6, who had seen A1 and A2 at the relevant point of time carrying wooden log and when he enquired them, they stated that they are proceeding to do away a person.

4. The Trial Court also relied upon the evidence of P.W.1, who is the brother of the deceased, who had deposed that on that day night, at about 9.00 PM, he enquired his mother and sister about his brother and they told that his brother had gone out to participate in the Bakrid party offered by one Nazar and when his mother called the deceased Thirunavukkarasu over phone, he told that he is with one Nazar to attend the Bakrid party. The said Nazar is arrayed as A3. Further, the Trial Court relied upon the confession statement of the accused A1 to the Village Administrative Officer, P.W.5, which has led to recovery of M.O.1 knife with blood stain and the serology report, Ex.P17, which shows that the blood stain found in the knife tallies with the blood group of the deceased Thirunavukkarasu.

5. The Trial Court disbelieved the theory of conspiracy hatched in the house of A4 and pursuant to the conspiracy, A3 called the deceased over phone to come to the scene of occurrence, which is near a graveyard, to have drinks, and when the deceased came there, A1 and A2 first attacked the deceased with wooden log and thereafter, brutally stabbed him on his back and over the body and also slit his neck using M.O.1 knife.

6. The learned counsels appearing for the appellants/A1 and A2 would submit that the link of circumstances has not been proved and it is severed at various points. The motive spoken by P.W.7 ought to have been established by the prosecution through the girl, whom the second accused is alleged to have teased. The origin for the motive has not been established except by P.W.7, who in fact admits that he engaged the deceased person to quarrel with the accused A2. Thereafter, in support of A2, A1 joined and there was quarrel between P.W.7 and A2. For these incidents, though it is stated that there was a police complaint and the Police advised them to behave properly since A2 and P.W.7 are college students, the prosecution had not placed any record to show that some complaint regarding this matter came to their notice and that they enquired and closed the complaint. Even otherwis