SAHADEVAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Did the court below err in accepting and acting upon the oral evidence of ocular witnesses PWs 1, 3 and 4?

(2.) These are the questions that are raised for consideration in this appeal by the learned Counsel for the appellant Sri. Lean Jose. The appellant faces a sentence of imprisonment for life under Section 302 I.P.C. He is sentenced further to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default to undergo S.I for a period of one month.

(3.) The prosecution alleged that at about 2 p.m. on 02.09.2005, when the deceased had come to the road near the shops of PWs 1 to 3, the appellant stopped the deceased on the road and did not allow his goods carriage autorickshaw loaded with tiles to move forward. He arrogantly told the deceased that he can proceed from there only after the road is repaired. The deceased got out from his autorickshaw. PW4 informed him that he should better inform the police. The deceased took out his mobile phone and tried to speak to PW12 for whom he had brought the consignment. This allegedly infuriated the appellant. He inflicted two injuries on the deceased with M.O1 Kodali. The deceased succumbed to his injuries on the spot. The prosecution alleged that the appellant had thereby committed the offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C.