LAWS(KER)-2023-8-79

AMIYA SAMANTHA Vs. STATE OF KERALA

Decided On August 03, 2023
Amiya Samantha Appellant
V/S
STATE OF KERALA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The sole accused in S.C. No.245 of 2013 on the files of the III Additional Sessions Court, Thrissur who stands convicted and sentenced for the offences punishable under Ss. 450, 394 and 302 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) challenges in this appeal, his conviction and sentence in the said case.

(2.) The body of one Jadab Kumar Das, a goldsmith at Irinjalakkuda, hailing from the State of West Bengal, was found in a partly decomposed state in the building in which he was residing on 14/10/2012. A case was registered in connection with the death of Jadab Kumar Das on the said day itself by Irinjalakkuda Police on the basis of the information furnished by his employer. On investigation, it was revealed that the accused, who is a relative of the deceased and who was residing with him, caused the death of the victim and committed robbery of the unfinished gold articles kept by him. Accordingly, a final report was filed in the case alleging commission of the offences punishable under Ss. 450, 394 and 302 of IPC. The accusation in the case is that on the night of 12/10/2012, the accused caused the death of the victim by inflicting stab injuries on him and robbed the unfinished gold articles kept by him weighing 203.690 grams, after intoxicating him.

(3.) The accused pleaded not guilty of the charges framed against him by the Court of Session, on committal for trial. Consequently, the prosecution examined 26 witnesses as PW1 to PW26 and proved 30 documents through them as Exts.P1 to P30 series. MOs 1 to 23 are the material objects in the case. After the prosecution tendered its evidence, when the accused was questioned under Sec. 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (the Code), he denied the incriminating circumstances brought out in evidence against him and maintained that he is innocent. Since the Court of Session did not consider the case to be one fit for acquittal under Sec. 232 of the Code, the accused was called upon to enter on his defence. The accused, however chose not to adduce any evidence.