RAMAKRISHNAN NAIR ALIAS RAJU Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Conviction and sentence in terms of judgment of learned Sessions Judge, Kottayam are assailed in this appeal by Ramakrishnan Nair alias Raju (hereinafter referred to as 'accused'). Learned trial Judge found accused guilty of offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short 'IPC') and sentenced him to imprisonment for life.

(2.) Prosecution version as unfolded during trial is as follows : On 26-12-1995, there was a festival at the Vilakkumadam Bhagavathy Temple on Vilakkumadam - Chathankulam road. While 'parayeduppu' in connection with festival was going on, an altercation ensued between accused and one Vijayan (P.W. 4) at about 8.30 p.m. When accused stabbed P.W. 4, deceased intervened and snatched the knife from him. On account of this, accused was nursing a grudge against deceased. At about 10 p.m. accused was standing in front of the shop of one Rajappan located near the temple. At that time, deceased along with Sivan (P.W. 2) and Chandra Mohan (P.W. 3) came there on a motor cycle. On seeing the deceased, accused abused him. Sensing danger, deceased left the scene and walked along the road towards the east. Accused followed him and when the deceased reached in front of Manickothu Veedu, accused put his hand around his shoulders, brought out a knife from his waist and stabbed the deceased on his throat. When the deceased tried to get hold of him, accused stabbed him on his chest and both of them fell down. P.W. 2 and others tried to get hold of accused. They retreated on being threatened by accused, who again stabbed the deceased several times. Thereafter he ran away with the bloodstained knife. Deceased was taken to Medical College Hospital, Kottayam. On the way, he succumbed to injuries. Attending doctor (P.W. 6) examined the deceased and pronounced him dead. Radhakrishnan (P.W. 1) lodged information at Pala Police Station and investigation was undertaken. On completion of investigation, chargesheet was submitted. Sixteen witnesses were examined to further prosecution version. Accused did not lead any evidence in support of his stand of innocence and false implication. Placing reliance on the evidence, especially those of the eye witnesses, learned trial Judge has convicted and sentenced accused as aforesaid.

(3.) In support of the appeal, Smt. Usha Venugopal, learned counsel for accused, raised several contentions to submit that prosecution has failed to establish its case. Firstly, it was contended that P.Ws. 2 and 3 are relatives of the deceased and, therefore, their evidence should have been discarded. Secondly, certain injuries noted on the deceased have not been explained and so prosecution version is suspect. Thirdly, it was submitted that plea of right to private defence has not been properly appreciated by learned trial Judge. Finally, it is submitted that this is not a case coming under Section 302, IPC and merely because several injuries existed, that cannot be a ground to apply Sec. 302, IPC. Learned Public Prosecutor of the State submitted that each of the points raised has been properly dealt with by learned trial Judge.