THANKAPPAN MOHANAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) At about 7 p.m. on 4-12-1983, now deceased George, husband of P.W.I sustained fatal injuries and succumbed to the injuries on the way to General Hospital, Thiruvalla. At 11 p.m. P.W.1 went to the Thiruvalla police station and gave information on the basis of which case was registered against eight persons under S.143, 147, 148, 341, 323 and 302 I.P.C. read with S.149 I.P.C. Ultimately, P.W. 23 Circle Inspector of Police, Thiruvalla laid charge against these eight persons for the aforesaid offences. The Trial Court convicted them under S.143, 147, 148 and 341 read with S.149 I.P.C. and S.302 read with S.149 I.P.C. For the offence under S.302 I.P.C. they were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. No separate sentence was awarded under the other counts. Second accused was further convicted under S.323 I.P.C. Accused have filed the above appeals challenging the conviction and sentence entered against them.

(2.) Prosecution case can be summarised as follows: George had an affair with P.W.7, wife of the third accused on account of which he incurred enmity of the third accused. Accused are mutually related to each other. P.W.1 is a vegetable vendor and George a fish vendor, both conducting their business in the Koottoor market. On the evening of 4-12-1983 P.W.1 was doing business in the market At about 7 p.m. George rushed to her and asked her to collect vegetables in the basket and suggested that they should leave the place since accused persons were coming there and he did not know why they were doing so. P.W.1 began to collect vegetables. By that time the eight accused reached the scene. First accused was armed with M.O.5 sword stick. Third accused was armed with M.O. 8 iron rod. Fourth accused was armed with M.O. 6 dagger. Fifth accused was armed with M.O. 9 spring stick. Other accused were not armed. Third accused beat George above the left eye brow with M.O. 8. First accused hit him with sword stick on his chest, right elbow and left hip. Second accused snatched a tapioca stump which was being used by P.W. 1 for hanging the balance and beat George on his left shoulder and the stump broke into M.O. 7 series. Second accused beat P.W.1 on her neck with his hand. Fourth accused stabbed George with M.O. 6 dagger on his back and left finger. Fifth accused beat him on the back of his head. Accused 6 to 8 pushed George down and dragged him to and from on the ground. When people rushed to the scene accused left with their weapons. P.W. 1 helped George to stand up and he took a few steps and fell down. PWs 1,6 and others took George to General Hospital, Thiruvalla in a car driven by P.W.9. P.W.13 Civil Surgeon attached to the hospital examined George at 7.30 p.m. and found him dead. At 11 p.m. P.W.1 went to Thiruvalla police station and gave Ext. Pl information on the basis of which P.W. 22, A.S.I. registered the case. The next day P.W.23 took over investigation. He held inquest over the body and questioned witnesses. Post mortem was conducted by P.W. 14. P.W. 23 prepared scene mahazar and seized M.O. 7 tapioca stump. He arrested accused 2,5,6 and 8 on 27-12-1983 and on the information given by them he recovered M.O. 5 as per Ext. P8 mahazar attested by P.W.16. He arrested accused 3 and 7 on 7-1-1984 and on the information given by the third accused he seized M.O. 5 under Ext. P9 mahazar attested by P.W. 7. He arrested accused 1 and 4 on 22-1-1984. On the basis of the information given by the first accused he recovered M.O. 5 under Ext. P10 mahazar attested by P.W. 18. On the basis of the information given by the fourth accused he recovered M.O. 6 dagger under Ext. P11 mahazar attested by P.W.18. Material objects were caused to be sent and plan of the scene was got prepared. He laid the charge after completing investigation.

(3.) Accused told the Sessions Court that they originally belonged to Marxist Communist Party but left the party and formed a new group and therefore the local Marxists entertained ill feeling towards them and foisted a false case. They denied their complicity in the occurrence, denied the evidence regarding motive and the occurrence. Sixth accused who had a shop near the scene stated that George went to his shop broke his petromax and when a crowd gathered George went eastwards followed by the group and he was involved in a fight.