KUNJUMON @ MOHANAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Is the accused entitled to the benefit of doubt on the basis of the totality of inputs available in this case This question is raised for consideration before us in this appeal by Sri. P. Vijaya Bhanu, the learned senior counsel for the appellant. The appellant has been found guilty, convicted and sentenced under Section 302 I. P. C to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2 lakhs. Default sentence has also been imposed. The appellant is alleged to have caused the death of his brother in law Balan, by inflicting multiple stab injuries on him with MO. 1 weapon on the public road near the shop of PW1. Property disputes allegedly operated as the motive.

(2.) Investigation commenced with Ext. P1 (a) F. I. R registered on the basis of Ext. P1 F. I statement lodged by PW1, an alleged eye witness. Investigation was completed and final report was filed by PW11 before the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction. The learned Magistrate after observing all legal formalities committed the case to the court of session. The learned Sessions Judge took cognizance of the offence alleged against the appellant. The appellant denied the charge framed against him by the learned Sessions Judge; Thereupon the prosecution examined PWs 1 to 11 and proved Exts. P1 to P10. MOs. 1 to 11 series were also marked.

(3.) In the course of cross examination of the prosecution witnesses and when examined under Section 313 Cr. P. C. the appellant/accused appears to have taken up a defence of total denial. He took the specific stand that the witnesses were not speaking the truth. He did not adduce any defence evidence - oral or documentary.