Suspicion alone cannot sustain a conviction; a complete chain of circumstantial evidence is required to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice K.Surender)

1. The appellants, who are arrayed as A1 and A2, were convicted for the murder of 8 year old boy and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 r/w 34 of IPC and they were also convicted for the offence under Section 3(2)(v) of SCs/STs (POA) Act, 1989 vide judgment in Spl. S.C.No.53 of 2013 dated 23.01.2017 and 25.01.2017 passed by the Special Judge- cum- VII Additional District and Sessions Judge at Mahabubnagar. Aggrieved by the same, present appeal is filed.

2. According to the prosecution case, on 26.10.2011, the mother of the victim boy P.W.1 lodged complaint Ex.P1. In the said complaint on which P.W.1 put her right hand thumb impression, it is stated that her son who was aged 8 years was earlier joined in Bharat Sai (Deaf and Dumb) residential school located at Telangana Chowrastha, Mahabubnagar. On 26.10.2011 at 8.30 a.m, she received phone call from A1 that some unknown persons cut the throat of her son resulting in his death. P.W.1 and others went to the hostel and found the deceased in a pool of blood. In the said complaint, PW1 expressed suspicion that A1 and A2 were responsible for the death of the victim boy. Complaint was received by P.W.10, who registered the crime. P.W.10, then went to the scene of offence and examined the scene. In the presence of P.W.6 and another, panchanama was conducted. The statements of P.W 1 mother, PW2 relative of PW1 and PW6 also a relative of PW1, were recorded. After concluding inquest proceedings, the dead body was sent for postmortem examination. P.W.8 Doctor, conducted postmortem examination and found that there was incision over neck which was 5 inches in length. P.W.8 opined that both injuries could be caused by sharp edged instrument. P.W.8, however stated that he cannot say the exact weapon used in causing injuries.

3. P.W.12, according to the prosecution, is the resident of Koilkonda Village. According to the prosecution, A2 confessed before P.W.12 that both A1 and A2 murdered the deceased boy.

4. P.W.13 took up investigation from P.W.11. On 04.11.2011, A2 was apprehended. Her statement was recorded. Pursuant to her confession, her blood stained saree (MO1) was recovered.

Thereafter, P.W.13 went to the house of A1 and arrested him. Pursuant to his confession, blood stained shirt was seized. The wearing apparel that were seized from A1 and A2 were sent for FSL analysis. Under Ex.P19/FSL report, it was opined that human blood was found with blood group A.

5. The Investigating Officer further collected caste certificate of the deceased boy and thereafter filed charge sheet.

6. Learned Sessions Judge examined P.Ws.1 to 3 and marked Exs.P1 to P20. MO1 is the blood stained saree of A2, MO2 is the blood stained shirt of A1, MO3 is the blade which was allegedly used in slitting throat of the boy. Learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellants on the basis of circumstantial evidence.

7. P.W.1 who is the mother of the victim boy lodged complaint Ex.P1 stating that her deceased son of eight years was found in the hostel in a pool of blood with cut injuries to his throat. On 26.10.2011, she filed complaint expressing suspicion that A1 and A2 were responsible for the death. The witness was declared hostile after P.W.1 was cross-examined by the counsel on record. During the course of cross-examination, P.W.1 stated that she does not have acquaintance with A1 and A2 and she did not see them and she did not go to school for admitting her son. P.W.1 also denied having knowledge whether A1 and A2 were the perpetrators and running the school. Learned Public Prosecutor cross-examined P.W.1 and suggested that on account of the compromise, she stated false, which suggestion was denied.

8. P.W.2 is the paternal uncle of the deceased, who turned hostile to the prosecution case. P.W.3 stated that Bharat Sai (Deaf and Dumb) school was in the residential area and A2 was working in the school as attender. On one day, around 5.30 a.m,