STATE Vs. THOMAS ABRAHAM ALIAS KUNJUKUTTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is by the State against the judgment in Sessions Case No. 52 of 1958 of the Sessions Court of Kottayam acquitting the accused Thomas Abraham alias Kunjukutty. He was charged for the murder of Rev. Fr. Mathai, Vicar of the Anthinad Church by stabbing him with a knife at about mid -night on 22 -1 -1958. Rev. Fr. Mathai became the Vicar of the Anthinad Church about six months prior to his death. He was living in a building situated to the south of the Church. Just to the south of his room is the kitchen. At the time of the incident, P. W. 7, a boy aged 15, was employed as a servant by the Vicar. He used to sleep in the kitchen. At about 8 P. M., on the date of the incident, the Vicar had his meals and he went to sleep by 9 P. M. P. W. 1 is the Sexton attached to the Church. As usual he came to the Church at 5 -30 the next morning. He went inside for the purpose of ringing the Church bell, when he saw the dead body of the Vicar over the door step of his room, partly inside the room and partly outside. The body was naked and completely drenched in blood, P. W. 1 rang the Church bell and woke up the servant boy who was found sleeping in the kitchen. On hearing the bell, a crowd gathered. P. W. 1 proceeded to the Meenachil Police Station and lodged the information at 8 -15 A. M. Therein, he stated that it was the accused who was responsible for the murder, as he bore a serious grudge against the Vicar and he had been seen by P. Ws. 5, 11 and others at about mid -night proceeding towards the Church, declaring that the Vicar should be killed. The statement was recorded by P. W. 21, the Sub -Inspector, and it is marked Ext. P. 1. The case was registered on the basis of that statement. P. W. 23, the Circle Inspector, was informed about it and he took charge of the investigation The accused was absconding till 10 -4 -1958 when he surrendered in court.

(2.) THE accused pleaded not guilty. He alleged that it was a false charge brought against him and that the witnesses were not speaking the truth. He admitted that there was difference of opinion between him and the Vicar regarding the distribution of milk powder, but added that he was not on inimical terms with the Vicar as alleged. He denied that he had gone near the Church on the night of the incident. He has also explained his absence from the locality from the time of the incident till he surrendered in court. He stated that when he was going to the Church on hearing the Church bell ringing at 5 -30 A.M. on 23 -1 -1958, he was told by his brother -in -law that somebody had murdered the Vicar, that some of the people who gathered were saying that he was responsible for it and that they were preparing to assault him. As advised by his brother -in -law, he immediately went to Alleppey. He lived there for few days with his father who advised him to appear in court only after the case was charged by the police.

(3.) THERE is no direct evidence to connect the accused with the crime. The prosecution rests its case upon the following circumstances: -