M. K. Mukherjee, J. - (1.) George alias Vakkachan, Rajeev and Joshy, the three appellants before us (arrayed as A1 to A3, respectively in the trial Court and hereinafter so referred to) along with four others, (A4 to A7) were put up of trial before an Additional Sessions Judge, Kottayam to answer charges under Sections 143, 147, 148, 449, and 302 read with Section 149, I.P.C. The gravamen of the charges were that on May 28, 1990 at or about 11 p.m. they formed themselves into an unlawful assembly with the common object of committing the murder of Sasidharan Nair and in prosecution thereof they trespassed into his house and hacked him to death. The trial ended in acquittal of all of them; and aggrieved thereby the respondent-State of Kerala filed an appeal and Smt. Sarojini Amma (mother of the deceased) filed a revision petition before the High Court. The High Court also issued a suo motu Rule calling upon the seven acquitted persons to show cause why their acquittal should not be set aside. All the matters were heard together by the High Court; and by a common judgment it set aside the acquittal of the three appellants and convicted them under Section 302, read with Sections 34 and 449, I.P.C., while affirming the acquittal of others. For the above convictions the High Court sentenced each of them to suffer imprisonment for life and rigorous imprisonment for five years respectively, with a direction that the sentences shall run concurrently. The above judgment of the High Court is under challenge in these appeals preferred by the appellants under Section 2 of the Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act read with Section 379, Cr.P.C.
(2.) Briefly stated, the prosecution case is as under:- (a) The deceased Sasidharan Nair was a petty trader and lived in Pulickel House in Anicaud village within the jurisdiction of Pallikkathodu Police Station. He was also a reporter for 'Thaniniram' daily published from Kottayam. On May 19, 1990 a news item appeared in the daily (Ext. P. 31 (a)) in which serious imputations were made against high placed police officers of Kottayam district and one Thadivakkan of Elikkulam village. It was alleged therein that Thadivakkan was a pimp and gunda and had great influence over corrupt police officers to whom he supplied women and wine and under cover of their protection carried on his immoral activities unabashedly in Palai town. Thadivakkan, who was none other than A1, was upset and enraged by the above defamatory publication. He, therefore, along with the other six accused persons went to the house of the deceased armed with deadly weapons to kill him on the fateful night. The three appellants entered into the room where the deceased was sleeping with his wife (P.W. 2) and child and started assaulting him. While A2 and A3 dealt blows upon him with stick and iron rod, A1 stabbed him with a knife. On that very night while on the way to the Medical College Hospital, Kottayam, he succumbed to his injuries. (b) P.W. 1 (Ninan Varghese), a neighbour of the deceased, who had rushed to the scene of offence on hearing the commotion, was told by the deceased that Urulikunnam Vakkachan had stabbed him with knife. Next morning he went to Pallikkathodu Police Station and gave a report of the incident (Ext. P. 1) which was recorded by P.W. 30 (Thomas), a Sub-Inspector of Police; and thereupon a case was registered against A1 and three unidentified persons. P.W. 54 (M. Samuel), Deputy Superintendent of Police, took up investigation and went to the Medical College Hospital where the dead body of Sasi was lying. After holding inquets he sent the dead body to the Forensic Science Department for post-mortem examination which was conducted by P.W. 51 (Dr. Velayudhan). (c) P.W. 54 then went to the house of the deceased and seized among other articles, a knife (M.O. 1), a blood smeared cross beam of bed stead (M.O. 2), a shoe, a blood stained lungi and some scalp hairs. He continued with the investigation till May 31, 1990 and then entrusted it to P.W. 52 (Abraham Mathew), Circle Inspector of Pampadi, who seized a car bearing registration No. KEK 3114 in which the accused had gone to commit the murder. Investigation was again taken over by P.W. 54 and he arrested A2 and A3. At the instance of A2 a stick (M.O. 3) was seized from a bamboo cluster on the side of Pallikkathodu-Chengalam Road. Later on he arrested A1 on June 7, 1990. On completion of investigation P.W. 54 submitted charge-sheet against the accused persons.
(3.) The appellants pleaded not guilty to the charges levelled against them and contended that they had been falsely implicated at the instance of the police. A1, on being examined under Section 313, Cr.P.C., stated that P.W. 50 (Sreekumar), the driver of Car No. KEK 3114, had made a false statement before the Magistrate (recorded under Section 164, Cr.P.C.) due to threat by the police. According to him prior to the examination of P.W. 50 in Court his brother was caught by the police at Thiruvalla with some ganja in his car and to get his brother exonerated from that case he gave false evidence at the instance of P.W. 54.;