SABU Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants herein are the accused Nos.1, 2 and 4 in S.C. No.323/2001 of the Court of Session, Pathanamthitta. The 1st accused is the son of the 4th accused, and the 2nd accused is their relative. The third one mentioned in the final report was a juvenile at the relevant time, and so, the case against him was filed before the Juvenile Justice Board. The appellants faced prosecution in the court below under Section 302 I.P.C on the allegation that at about 3 p.m on 14.12.1997, near the Panavila junction, they inflicted serious and fatal injuries on the body of one Ibrahim, due to which Ibrahim died at the hospital at 1.30 p.m on 16.12.1997. The crime was registered by the Police, on the complaint preferred by the brother of the deceased at about 10.30 a.m on 16.12.1997, under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323 and 324 read with Section 149 IPC, against these appellants and three others, including the juvenile. Only a case of assault by six persons was reported at the Police Station initially. The case took a turn when the victim died after the F.I.R, at 1.30 p.m on 16.12.1997. On investigation, the Police found that the murder of Ibrahim was committed by these appellants and the juvenile, and accordingly, a final report was brought by the Police under Section 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C. A separate final report was filed as against the juvenile before the Juvenile Justice Board, Pathanamthitta. After compliance of the procedural formalities, the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Adoor committed the case to the Court of Session, from where, it was made over to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pathanamthitta for trial and disposal. The accused (appellants) appeared before the learned trial Judge, and pleaded not guilty to the charge framed against them under Section 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C.

(2.) The prosecution examined 17 witnesses and proved Exts.P1 to P16 documents in the trial court. The MO1 to MO6 properties were also identified during trial, including the weapons of offence. Ext.X1 case sheet was also proved at the instance of the prosecution. When examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C, all the accused denied the incriminating circumstances and projected a defence that Ibrahim died due to some other reason, and that it was not due to any injury inflicted by them, as the prosecution would allege. The accused did not adduce any oral evidence in defence, but Exts.D1 and D2 were marked on their side.

(3.) On an appreciation of the evidence, the learned trial Judge found that this is not in fact a case of culpable homicide amounting to murder, but only a case of culpable homicide punishable under the first part of Section 304 I.P.C. Accordingly, the three accused were found guilty under the first part of Section 304 I.P.C with the aid of Section 34 I.P.C. On conviction, they were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years each, and to pay a fine of 5, 000/- each by judgment dated 29.8.200 Aggrieved by the judgment of conviction, the three accused have come up in appeal.