SREEKUMAR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The first accused in S.C. No.458 of 2013 on the files of the Additional Sessions Court-V, Thiruvananthapuram who stands convicted and sentenced for the offences punishable under Ss. 447 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code (the IPC), is the appellant in this appeal preferred under Sec. 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (the Code).

(2.) The case relates to the death of one Binu who was residing with his family in a tribal settlement. He was engaged in rubber tapping and tree felling works. The appellant is a person who was involved in a few forest offences and was sought to be arrested in connection with the said cases by the forest officials. On 5/10/2011, when Binu went out in the morning as usual for his works, he saw the appellant on the way. As Binu and others in the settlement were required by the forest officials to inform them if they spot the appellant in the locality, Binu informed the presence of the appellant in the locality to PW8, a Forest Reserve Watcher and returned home. The indictment against the appellant in the case is that after sometime, by about 9 a.m., while Binu was washing his hands in front of his house, the appellant, his mother Saraswathy and two others namely Sreejith and Ratheesh trespassed into the courtyard of the house of Binu and the appellant asked Binu whether he informed the presence of the appellant in the locality to the forest officials and also whether he thought that the appellant would not come out of jail. It was alleged that the appellant thereupon took out a chopper, hung on his waist and inflicted several cut injuries on the body of Binu using the said weapon. It was also alleged that when Binu attempted to ward off the attack with his hand, his ring finger was chopped off and Binu died at once as a result of the said injuries. As far as the involvement of other accused are concerned, the allegation is that Sreejith and Ratheesh caught hold of the body of Binu so as to enable the appellant to inflict injuries on Binu and the mother of the appellant, Saraswathy stood near and exhorted the appellant to kill Binu.

(3.) On the basis of the information furnished by PW1, Neyyar Dam Police registered a case on the same day itself. PW21 is the officer who investigated the case and laid the final report. There were altogether seven accused in the final report. Sreejith and Ratheesh referred to above were accused Nos. 2 and 3 respectively. As they could not be apprehended, the case against them was split up and the remaining accused were committed for trial. The remaining accused other than the appellant were, Saraswathy, the mother of the appellant, and two others who alleged to have harboured the appellant after the crime. As the accused who were committed for trial denied the charge framed and read over to them by the Court of Session, the prosecution examined 21 witnesses as PWs 1 to 21 and proved through them Exts.P1 to P26 documents. MOs 1 to 18 are the material objects identified by the witnesses. The appellant and other accused did not enter on defence when called upon to do so after the evidence by the prosecution and after the incriminating circumstances in the evidence were put to them as provided in Sec. 313 of the Code, though the appellant maintained the stand that he is innocent and he was in Tamil Nadu on the relevant day. The Court of Session, in the circumstances, on an appraisal of the materials on record, convicted and sentenced the appellant and acquitted the remaining accused, who faced the trial, of the charges levelled against them. As noted, the appellant is aggrieved by the conviction and sentence imposed on him and hence, this appeal.