Harjit Singh Bedi, J. - (1.) The prosecution story, given by PW-1 Shaji, who is the brother of the deceased, Sathyan is as under:At about 1:45 p.m. on the 24th March, 1994, Shaji (PW-1) was to travel by bus on the route from Thalassery to Vataparra via Ayitharapuzha and Kuthuparamba. He got into the bus at Ayitharapara. As he entered the bus, he found his brother Sathyan also traveling by the same bus and as there was a vacant seat besides him, he too sat down on the seat. 10 or 15 other passengers including Prakasan (PW-2), Shyamala (PW-3) and the accused Sasi and Dasan were also in the bus. At about 1:55 p.m. the bus reached Ayitharapuzha but before P W-1 and the deceased could get down from the bus, Sasi and Dasan shouted out that they would be murdered and on saying so they pushed PW-1 and Sathyan out on to the road.Three other persons then ran towards the bus from Babus shop which was alongside the road. Ambu and Perutheri-accused handed over a sword each to Sasi and Dasan whereupon Sasi inflicted injuries on the hands of Shaji. Ashokan-accused who was armed with an axe caused injuries on the face and head of Sathyan whereas accused Babu armed with a long knife caused injuries on the left hand of Sathyan and Dasan inflicted a stab injury with a sword on the stomach of Sathyan. The other accused also inflicted some injuries on the deceased as well as on PW-1. As per PW-1s statement, he had recognized all the seven accused who had inflicted injuries on him and his brother. A police jeep soon arrived at the spot and PW-I and Sathyan were taken to Kuthuparamba Hospital but as they were in critical condition, they were removed in a car and brought to the Thalassery Government Hospital where both of them were examined by the Doctor and while PW-1 was admitted therein Sathyan was referred to Kozhikode Medical College where he soon died. At about 5:30 p.m., the police arrived in the Thalassery Hospital and recorded the statement of PW-1 leading to the recording of the FIR referring to seven assailants but naming only four, and suggesting that the murder was the outcome of political rivalry as the accused belonged to the Bhartiya Janta Party whereas the deceased and PW-I were workers of the Congress Party. In the FIR it was also noted that the incident had been seen by Prakasan (PW-2) and Manoharan (PW-4). Sathyans dead body was also subjected to a postmortem, and PW-7 the doctor, found 58 injuries thereon, most of them incised and cutting wounds, some of them of huge dimensions. PW-I was also examined for the injuries by the doctor PW-8, and three incised wounds were found on him as well. On the completion of the investigation, the accused were charged for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 307, 324 and 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.
(2.) The Trial Court held that though PW-1 was an injured witness, yet he could not be believed as in the FIR he had named only four accused i.e. Sasi, Dasan, Ashokan and Babu, although, he had referred to three others and had in a supplementary statement to the circle inspector named these three as well and that he had also admitted to the deep political animosity between the two groups, which cast a doubt on his story. The court also held that the police had admittedly carried PW-1 and his fatally injured brother in the police jeep to the hospital, but as the police officer had made no attempt at recording the statement of PW-I, at that stage, the prosecution story was, apparently, an after-thought and could not be relied upon. The Court also observed that the manner in which the injuries had been caused by all the accused, could not be believed as the eye-witnesses were discrepant on this material aspect. The Trial Court went through the evidence of PW-2, Prakasan and found that he had not been able to explain his presence in the bus at the relevant time despite the fact that his presence had been specifically indicated in the FIR. The court then examined the evidence of Shyamala (PW-3), one of the other passengers in the bus, and observed that her presence too was doubtful as her name did not figure in the FIR. The court also found that PW-4, another eye-witness had deposed that he had been present at the bus stop at Ayithara near Babus shop and that when the bus had stopped and the passengers were getting down, he had heard a great deal of shouting and had subsequently, witnessed the incident in which the four main accused-Appellants herein caused a large umber of injuries to the deceased and PW-1, but as PW-4 was admittedly an autorickshaw driver operating from Kuthuparamba and as his autorickshaw was stationed at Kuthuparamba, the story projected by him that he had come to Ayithara to get it repaired, appeared to be doubtful. The court also opined that the eyewitness account was not substantiated by the medical evidence in the light of the fact that all the incised injuries appeared to bear clear-cut margins whereas the prosecution had suggested that accused Nos. 5 to 7 had been armed with a crow bar and sticks.
(3.) The court also went into the evidence of the primary investigating officer PW-15 and opined that there appeared to be something remiss in the manner in which the investigation had been conducted by him. In conclusion, the Trial Court observed that: On an appreciation of the entire evidence available on record, I am to hold that the evidence of the alleged eyewitnesses P Ws 1 to 4 are inconsistent regarding the weapon used and also the witnesses have improved their version when they deposed before the Court. Several material points, which have not been stated to the police have been deposed before the court. I have no doubt in my mind that in this case the witnesses have not deposed before this Court the real incident that happened. Developments were made and therefore, I am unable to accept the version of the witnesses as true and correct. So also, the medical evidence is not in conformity with the evidence given by PW-2 and the case of the prosecution that murder of Sathyan and Shaji formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and waited at the shop of the 4th accused Babu for the deceased to reach the place in the bus also cannot be believed. In this circumstance, I am to hold that the prosecution has not presented before this Court the true incident in this case in which another youth has been murdered allegedly due to the political animosity.Therefore, 1 am to hold that the prosecution has failed to prove the case convincingly against these accused. ;