STATE OF KERALA Vs. VASUDEVAN PILLAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The accused-Respondent and his wife faced trial on charges under Sections 302, 324 and 447 of the Penal Code. The wife was acquitted by the trial court. The accused-Respondent was found guilty of the offences charged and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life, rigorous imprisonment for one year and simple imprisonment for three months respectively for the three offences. The accused-Respondent filed an appeal before the High Court putting in issue his conviction. The High Court has allowed the appeal and acquitted the accused-Respondent. Feeling aggrieved, the State has come up in appeal by special leave.

(2.) We have carefully perused the judgment of the trial court as also of the High Court and other material available on the record and heard the learned Counsel for the parties. We are of the opinion that no case is made out for interfering with the judgment of acquittal recorded by the High Court.

(3.) The incident happened at about 8.30 a.m. on 17th December, 1987. According to the prosecution, on the previous evening of the date of the incident, Jagadamma was abused by the Respondent and his wife. A little before the time of the incident, the deceased-Chandran accompanied by his nephew-Anil Kumar (P.W. 1) visited Jagadamma and were apprised of what had happened the previous evening. The deceased-Chandran and Anil Kumar (P.W. 1) reached near the house of Respondent. Chandran asked the accused and his wife as to why they had abused his sister. After some verbal exchange, the Respondent opened an attack with a knife. The first blow of the knife was warded off by the deceased with his hands but he fell down. Then the Respondent sat on the belly of the deceased and inflicted a forceful blow of the knife which landed on the chest of the deceased. The deceased was rushed to the hospital but was found dead. The F.I.R. of the incident was lodged at 10 a.m. by Anil Kumar (P.W. 1) . Krishna Badran (P.W. 9) , Circle Inspector of Police investigated the offence whereafter the accused were challaned. The plea taken by the accused-Respondent was that in fact the deceased, his sister and Anil Kumar (P.W. 1) had attacked the Respondent, his wife and their daughter. In order to defend themselves, the accused-Respondent had brandished a knife and then he ran away throwing away the weapon on the way. The Respondent further pleaded that a police officer attached to Pooyapally police station was a close relative of Jagadamma and that is why the investigation was not objective and impartial ; it was one-sided and under the influence of the complaint, the accused-Respondent along with his wife were falsely implicated.