PULIYACHERI RAFEEK Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Can the theory of self strangulation by the deceased be accepted Is that theory sufficient to generate any reasonable doubt in the mind of this Court These questions loom large in this appeal. The appellant accused has been found guilty, convicted and sentenced in a prosecution under Section 302 IPC. The crux of the charge/allegation against him is that he on 25.05.2003 at some time prior to 11 a.m. committed the murder of his wife Shafeena aged about 19 years by strangulating her with M02 shawl of her Churidar.

(2.) Investigation commenced on the basis of Ext.P1 First Information statement lodged by PW1, a neighbour and land-lord of the residential building occupied by the appellant and his wife. Ext. P1 (a) First Information report was registered. Investigation was completed and final report was filed by PW19 before the Magistrate. Complying with all legal procedure, the case was committed by the learned Magistrate to the court of Sessions. The learned Sessions Judge took cognizance of the offence. Allegation/charge was denied by the accused. Thereupon the prosecution examined PWs 1 to 19 and proved Exts.P1 to P11. MOs 1 to 8 were also marked.

(3.) An appellate judgment is essentially the continuation of the judgment of the trial court. It must be read as such. We are not in these circumstances satisfied that it is necessary for us to re-narrate the oral and documentary evidence adduced before the Sessions Court in detail. Suffice it to say that the oral and documentary evidence adduced by both sides as also all the relevant materials available including section 313 statement have been read over to us in detail by the counsel for the rival contestants.