The judgment emphasizes the reliance on circumstantial evidence and the consideration of a confessional statement in establishing guilt in a murder case.

1. The appellant is the accused in Sessions Case No. 18 of 1951 on the file of the Sessions Court at Parur. He stood charged for the offence of murder punishable under S. 302, Indian Penal Code. After considering the evidence in the case, the learned Sessions Judge found that the act proved against the accused did not amount to the offence of murder, but only to culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Accordingly the accused was convicted under Part I of S. 304, I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years. It is against such conviction and sentence that the accused has preferred this appeal.

2. The case against the accused is that at about 10 O'clock on the night of 2.5.1124 the accused attacked deceased Ulahannan Ouseph Alias Kunju, inflicted a deep cut on the right side of his neck with a knife and thus caused his death. The occurrence is stated to have taken place at the point marked A in the Arappamattom lane in Thondikuzha Kara, Karikode Pakuthy, Thodupuzha Taluk. The situation of this lane as well as the point at which the occurrence is stated to have taken place are shown in the sketch Ext. I prepared and produced by the investigating officer. On the question that Ulahannan Ouseph Alias Kunju met with his death on the night of 2.5.1124 as the result of a cut sustained by him on the right side of his neck, there is no dispute in this case. This fact is also conclusively proved by the evidence recorded at the trial. Pw.1 is the brother and Pw. 2 is the widow of Ulahannan Ouseph. P.Ws. 5,7 and 8 are independent witnesses who are well acquainted with him. All these witnesses identified the dead body found in the Arappamattom lane on 3.5.1124 and which is described in Ext. B report prepared after holding an inquest on the dead body, as that of Ulahannan Ouseph. After the inquest the body was subjected to post-mortem examination by the Medical Officer Pw. 10 and Ext. G is the post-mortem certificate issued by him. Of the 8 injuries found on the body of Ulahannan Ouseph and which are described in Ext. G, the first injury was a gaping wound 4" x 11/2" bone-deep across the right side of the neck beginning from the thyroid cartilage and cutting the cartilage and all the soft tissues up to the cervical bone. This was a fatal injury according to Pw. 10. These items of evidence establish beyond doubt that Ulahannan Ouseph, the husband of Pw. 2, had sustained the wound on the right side of his neck and that he died as the result of that injury, on the night of 2.5.1124.

3. The plea of the accused is that he had nothing to do with the injury which resulted in the death of Ulahannan Ouseph. It is urged on behalf of the accused appellant that the evidence adduced by the prosecution is extremely unreliable and that such evidence does not establish the case alleged by the prosecution. At the outset it may be mentioned that there is no direct evidence to prove the act attributed to the accused. The act is sought to be proved by the several items of circumstantial evidence adduced by the prosecution witnesses and also by a confessional statement given by the accused. According to the prosecution the accused made the fatal attack on deceased Ulahannan Ouseph on the night of 2.5.1124 while they were returning home from the toddy shop at Ezhumuttam, after getting themselves fully drunk. The several connecting links in proof of this version are furnished by the evidence given mainly by P. Ws.1, 2, 5, 7, 8, 9,12 and 13 also by Exts. A to C, J, H and N. The learned Sessions Judge has believed such oral and documentary evidence. Pw. 2, who is the widow of the deceased Ulahannan Ouseph, has stated that he had left home at about noon on 2.5.1124 and that thereafter he never returned to his house. On the morning of 3.5.1124 she met his brother Pw.1 and told him that her husband had not returned home on the previous night and that a search should be made to find him out. This version is corroborated by Pw.1 also who