CHANDRAN, S/O. SUKUMARAN, PUTHUPARAMBIL VEETTIL, PANDARATHURUTHU THURA ALAPPAD VILLAGE, KARUNAGAPPALLY Vs. STATE OF KERALA - REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (i) Did the court below err in accepting and acting upon the oral evidence of P.Ws.1 to 3?

(2.) THE prosecution alleged that the appellant had inflicted stab injuries on the deceased in succession with M.Os.1 and 2 weapons. The deceased had allegedly intervened when P.W. 1 was illegally taken to the eastern compound of the house of the appellant and assaulted there. Thereby, the prosecution alleged that the appellant had committed the offences punishable under Secs.302 and 323 IPC. A2 and A3 also faced trial along with the appellant for the same charges. They were found guilty, convicted and sentenced under Sec.323 read with Sec.34 IPC. We are informed that A2 and A3 chose not to challenge the verdict of guilty, conviction and sentence imposed on them. Evidently nothing remains to be executed against A2 and A3 now.

(3.) THE accused persons, in the course of cross -examination of prosecution witnesses and later when examined under Sec.313 Cr.P.C. took up a fairly definite and specific stand. According to the appellant/A1, P.W.1 and the deceased were not victims of aggression; but they were aggressors. They had allegedly, along with P.W. 2 and C.W.3 Unni trespassed into the house of A1. They had assaulted D.W.3, the wife of A1. Hearing the commotion, local persons had also reached the scene of the occurrence. In the melee, deceased must have suffered the fatal injuries. This, in short, is the fairly definite stand taken by the appellant before the trial court.