P K NARAYANAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In Sessions Case No. 35 of 1987 on the file of the IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Ernakulam, four accused were tried for offences punishable under S. 120-B, 323, 326, 302 and 201 Indian Penal Code. The trail court acquitted A-4 and convicted A-1 under Section 120-B read with Section 302 Indian Penal Code and also convicted A-2 and A-3 under S. 302 read with Section 120-B Indian Penal Code and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life. On appeal, the High court acquitted A-3 but confirmed the convictions and sentences of A-1, P. K. Narayanan and A-2, V. V. Salim Sasi. Hence, A-1 has filed Criminal Appeal No. 315 of 1990 and A-2 has filed Criminal Appeal No. 316 of 1990 in this court. The prosecution case is as follows.

(2.) A-l is the owner and proprietor of Polakulath Tourist Home at Palarivattom, Ernakulam and two such other tourist homes in other places in addition to being an abkari contractor. V. V. Salim Sasi, A-2 was his driver and personal bodyguard. A-3 was a room boy in the tourist home and A-4 was the Manager of A-1. The deceased Peethambaran was in employment of A-l since June 1982. He was an honest young man and was a faithful and trusted employee. He was also a personal friend of A-l and enjoyed considerable freedom in the house of A-l. A-l had duplicate accounts of his income and some of them were kept in the house of the deceased. Public Witness 1, father of deceased, had close relations with A-l and he was a member of the administrative committee of the Palarivattom Hariharasutha temple of which A-l was the President. Public Witness 1 was looking after the administration of the temple. Sometime before the present incident which took place in the early hours of 21/4/1983, A-l began to distrust the deceased and he also suspected that the deceased was pilfering money from the cash collection of the tourist home. He therefore directed A-3 to keep a watch on the deceased. Being alerted about the growing hostility about him, the deceased decided to leave the employment in the tourist home and was in search of some other job. A-1 apprehended that if deceased left him he might disclose the inconvenient information regarding unaccounted wealth and so A-l wanted to eliminatethe deceased somehow or the other. On the fateful day the deceased and A-3 were on night duty in the tourist home and they along with another room boy occupied Room No. 411. Public Witness 3 had taken a room on 21/4/1983 and had to leave early in the morning on the new motor cycle to Trivandrum. Public Witness 3 checked out of the tourist home at 4 a. m. and left for Trivandrum on the motor cycle. At that time Public Witness 3 came down to the counter and found the deceased and A-3 sleeping in the visitors' room adjoining the counter. They were woken up. Public Witness 3 was the last person who saw the deceased alive before leaving and at that time he was in the company of A-3. Sometime around 4.30 a. m. the residents and employees of the tourist home and some of the neighbours heard cries and simultaneously they heard something heavy falling from the terrace of the tourist home. Hearing the cries and the sound, A-4 and Public Witness 17, the accountant who was staying together in one room and Public Witness 11, a Probationary Sub-Inspector came down to the counter and they found the southern door of the tourist home near the counter locked. As that could not be opened they went to the western door. A-4 opened the door through which some of the inmates entered the southern courtyard and found the body of Peethambaran who was then profusely bleeding. At the same time they saw a person running away towards the north along the main road. Public Witness 4 identified that person as A-2. At the behest of A-4 somebody fetched a car in which the deceased was taken to the hospital. Meanwhile Public Witness 1 also was informed about the incident and PWs 1 and 2 rushed to the City Hospital and from there to the Medical Trust Hospital, Ernakulam where they saw Public Witness 17 talking on the phone. Public Witness 17 led Public Witness 1 to the room where the deceased was lying with injuries. Public Witness 10, the medical officer, examined the deceased and declared him to be dead. A-4 and Public Witness 17 went to the police station and ultimately the Circle Inspector, Public Witness 57, rushed to the police station and saw A-4 and Public Witness 17 there. Public Witness 23, the SI recorded the FIR, Ex. P-59, and registered the crime as one of unnatural death. Public Witness 57 along with Public Witness 23 proceeded to tourist home and posted a constable there for guard duty. He held the inquest on the dead body at the hospital and examined PWs 1 and 2. Public Witness 55, the Assistant Professor of Forensic Medicine conducted the post-mortem and he opined that the death was not due to fall alone but there was evidence of violence. A case was registered under Section 302 Indian Penal Code. Public Witness 58, DSP, took up the investigation. He recovered chappals, MO II from the terrace belonging to the deceased. He prepared a mahazar regarding the topography of the area. After investigation, the case was referred as one of suicide. Public Witness 1, however, filed an application before the High court which set aside the referred report and ordered reinvestigation. The State filed a petition before the Supreme court and while dismissing the special leave petition this court directed the reinvestigation by CBI. CBI thereupon proceeded with the reinvestigation. Public Witness 61, the CBI Officer included a number of witnesses including the Forensic Expert and Psychiatrist. He also conducted a dummy experiment by Public Witness 53 Director of central Forensic Laboratory with the help of PWs 54 to 56 and Public Witness 60, the Senior Scientific Officer. Public Witness 61 arrested the accused andalso subjected them to polygraph (lie detector) test. After completion of the investigation, he laid the charge-sheet under S. 120-B, 323, 326, 302 and 201 Indian Penal Code. The prosecution examined PWs 1 to 61 and marked several exhibits. The plea of the accused has been one of denial. As stated above ultimately A-1 and A-2 are found guilty. On the basis of the evidence the trial court formulated six points for determination and they are: "48. The points that arise for determination in this case :

(3.) In appeal, the High court, however, held that so far as A-3 is concerned, there is no positive evidence against him and accordingly acquitted him and confirmed the rest of the findings of the trial court.