SIVANKUTTY NAIR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed challenging the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant/accused in S.C.482/2001 on the file of the Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Thiruvananthapuram.

(2.) The prosecution case is that on 2/5/1999, at about 9 p.m, when PWs 1 to 3 (son, wife and daughter of the deceased Subair Kunju) and the deceased Subair Kunju were in their house, the appellant/accused, who was their neighbour was seen coughing and spitting on a small public pathway in front of their house. It is alleged that when PW1, son of the deceased Subair Kunju, had come out of the house and had questioned the appellant/accused as to why he was coughing and spitting, the appellant/accused got infuriated. It is alleged that the appellant/accused and PW1 engaged in a tussle and the appellant/accused took out a folding knife (a penknife) and stabbed PW1 causing an injury on his right thigh. On hearing the cries of PW1, the deceased Subair Kunju and his wife (PW2) came rushing out and while they were trying to ensure that the appellant/ accused did not cause any further injury to PW1, the appellant/accused stabbed the deceased Subair Kunju and he died almost instantaneously. Following the investigation of the matter, a final report was filed before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Thiruvananthapuram from where it was committed to the Sessions Court, Thiruvananthapuram. The Sessions Court, Thiruvananthapuram made over the matter to the court of the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Thiruvananthapuram for the purpose of trial and disposal.

(3.) Charges were framed against the appellant/accused under Ss. 447, 307 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code'). The appellant/accused pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined PWs 1 to 13 and marked Exts.P1 to P21 documents. The material objects, including the knife, were not identified during the trial as those were reported missing. On the closure of the prosecution evidence, the appellant/accused was examined under Sec. 313 of the Cr.P.C. The appellant/accused denied all incriminating materials appearing against him and also set up a plea of private defence. Finding no reason to acquit the appellant/accused under Sec. 232 of the Cr.P.C, the trial court called upon the appellant/accused to tender his defence evidence. DW1, the wife of the appellant/accused was examined on the side of the defence.