STATE OF KERALA Vs. ANTONY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred by the State of Kerala against the judgment of acquittal passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Thiruvananthapuram in S.C.No. 296 of 2005.

(2.) Prosecution case is as follows:-

(3.) The learned Special Government Pleader for Attrocities Against Women and Children Smt.Ambika Devi argued that the Court below erred in arriving at the conclusion that the accused are not guilty. Court below went wrong in concluding that the evidence of eye-witnesses PWs 1 and 2 is not believable since they did not explain how A3 got injured during the incident. Court failed to appreciate even the basic facts of the case. Court below also went wrong in finding that there was no blood-stains even on MO1. In spite of clear proof as to the place of occurrence from the evidence of witnesses, Court below took a view to find that the place of occurrence is not proved. Court below also failed to notice that the false explanation made by A1 should be taken as an additional circumstance against him in the light of available evidence. The impugned judgment is quiet unreasonable and perverse. She vehemently argued for the reversal of the finding of the trial Court. She relied on Sikander Singh and Others v. State of Bihar, 2010 AIR(SC) 3580 to show that it cannot be held as an unqualified proposition of law that whenever the accused sustains an injury in the same occurrence, the prosecution is obliged to explain the injury and on failure of which the prosecution has to be disbelieved. She also placed reliance on Shajahan and Others v. State of Kerala and Another,2007 2 KHC 88 and Krishan and Others v. State of Haryana, 2006 12 SCC 459 to affirm the above point.