KIZHAKKETHIL SULAIMAN S/O AVRAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA
LAWS(KER)-1963-8-24
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Decided on August 30,1963

KIZHAKKETHIL SULAIMAN AVRAN Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF KERALA Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

KISHUN MANDAR V. EMPEROR [REFERRED TO]
MOHAMMED ISMAIL V. EMPEROR [REFERRED TO]
KING V. SRIDHAR [REFERRED TO]
KESHAVLAL HARILAL V. EMPEROR [REFERRED TO]
STATE VS. RAM CHANDRA [REFERRED TO]
GANDHARBA RATH VS. APARTI SAMAL [REFERRED TO]
KOCHU KUNJU KUNJU VS. STATE OF KERALA [REFERRED TO]
VARKEY ALIAS KOCHU VS. STATE OF KERALA [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)The appellant in this case has been convicted for offences punishable under S.302 and 224, I. P. C., for intentionally or knowingly causing the death of a police constable, Govindan Nair alias Muhammad Ali at about 6 p.m., on 9-11-62 in front of the tea shop of one Muhammed examined as P. W. 7 in the case.
The accused is an old offender haying his name in the K. D: register maintained at the Palghat town police station. At the Chittoor Police Station a case crime No. 123 of 1962 was registered for house breaking and theft under S.457 and 380, I. P. C., and Pw. 8 a Head constable attached to that station was investigating into the case. He suspected that the accused must have had some connection with the crime and was trying to get at him. His house had also been searched. Deceased Govindan Nair alias Muhammed Ali was a constable attached to the Chittoor Police station, but at the time of the occurrence was on leave and was living with his wife at Olavakkot. Getting information that the accused was in Olavakkot, Pw. 8 asked Govindan Nair to arrest the accused and produce him at the station.

The deceased was making enquiries about the accused and on the date of the occurrence information was received that the accused had gone to the Sulkhees theatre at Olavakkot for the matinee show. So the deceased police constable waited for him at the gate of the theatre. When the accused came out after the show the deceased stopped and arrested him and wanted him to go with him to the Chittoor police station as the Sub Inspector of police wanted to question him as he was suspected in a cognizable offence. The accused submitted to the arrest and they were proceeding along the road and reached Pw. 7's tea shop. The shop is on the Palghat - Olavakkot road. In front of the tea shop a beach is placed for people to sit.

Pw. 4 Hamsa was present near the lorry brokers' office, to the north - east of Pw. 7's tea shop. He saw the accused and the police constable coming along the road, accosted him and accompanied them to the shop. On reaching there the accused sat on the bench in front of the tea shop and the police constable stood near him. Pws. 1 and 2 who had gone there to take tea were sitting on the bench. The deceased questioned Pw. 1 to verify whether the accused was Sulaiman who was wanted by him. The accused wanted tea and the deceased asked the shopkeeper to supply tea to him. Pw. 3 who was the attender in the shop served tea and a bun to the accused. After the accused had taken tea Pw 3 asked the accused for money. The accused then stood up, put his hand in the trouser pocket pretending to take money and suddenly took out a dagger and stabbed the police constable on his abdomen. After doing so, he ran away with the weapon. Deceased followed the accused for a little distance, but fell down. Pws. 4 and 5 followed the accused. Pw. 4 returned after going a short distance. Pw. 5 followed the accused for about two furlongs. When the accused turned round and threatened to kill him, he got frightened and made a hastily retreat.

The deceased was forthwith removed to the headquarters hospital, Palghat. Pw. 11the Medical Officer attached to the hospital examined him and admitted him as an inpatient. He had a penetrating wound with clean cut edges on the left side of the abdomen 1" x 1/2" extending up to the abdominal cavity running vertically above downwards and situated 2" above the umbilicus. On exploration it was found that there was an incised wound on the left lobe of the liver. There was a bleeding point in the surface of the adjacent diodenum and there was a tear with clean cut edge on the upper mesentery.

On intimation received from the hospital Pw. 13 the District Magistrate of Palghat reached the hospital at 7-4g p.m. and recorded the dying declaration Ex. P 9(a). The doctor was present and he has certified that the patient was conscious. Pw. 17 the Circle Inspector of police also got information and proceeded to the hospital along with the Sub Inspector Pw. 18. The injured was questioned, but as he was unconscious, no statement could be taken from him. Statement was recorded from Pw. 1 and on that a case was registered. Pw. 17 questioned Pws. 1, 2, 5 and 7 at the hospital. He then proceeded to the scene of occurrence. Next day morning he prepared the scene mahazar. The accused was in hiding. Information was given to all the police stations to arrest the accused. Pw. 9 the head constable attached to Mannarghat police station got some information about the accused and he along with Pw. 10 the village officer and a police party arrested the accused at a place called Viyyakkurissi. The body of the accused was searched and the dagger M. O. 1 which he had with him was taken into custody. The accused was then taken to the Palghat police station.

On 10-11-62 the injured succumbed to his injuries. The Circle Inspector then went to the hospital and held the inquest. After the inquest Pw. 12 the Medical Officer conducted the autopsy. The doctor has given evidence that the injury is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. The accused was also examined by Pw. 12, but he had no injuries.

(2.)When questioned on the evidence in the committing Magistrate's Court the accused stated that he was not guilty and that he had not stabbed the police constable. When further questioned he stated that he had not seen the police constable on that day and that he did not run away with the knife in his hand. In the Sessions Court the accused, however, admitted that the deceased met him in front of the theatre and asked him to go to the police station, but he stated that he did not agree to go and but ran away from the place and escaped. He denied having accompanied the deceased to Pw. 7's tea shop and denied having stabbed him as spoken to by the witnesses. He stated that himself and Pws. 1 and 4 were on inimical terms and they were giving false evidence. Asked about his arrest he stated that he was arrested while he was in the Mannarghat town, but denied having the dagger with him.
(3.)That the deceased police constable sustains a serious injury on the abdomen and died as a result of the injury is amply proved and is not disputed. So the question that arises for decision is whether it was the accused who inflicted the injury. The prosecution has examined a number of witnesses in proof of their case. (After discussion of the evidence His Lordship concluded :) There is thus overwhelming evidence to bring home the guilt to the accused.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.