PADMACHANDRAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these appeals are filed from the judgment of the Sessions Court, Kollam in Sessions Case No. 564 of 1999. Altogether there were ten accused in the above case and they were charged for the offences punishable under sections 114, 143, 147, 148, 120 (B) and 302 read with section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. A3, A8, A9 and A10 were acquitted by the Sessions Court. Other accused were convicted and sentenced by the Sessions Court as follows:

(2.) PWS . 1, 2, 4 and 5 to 10 were cited as eye witnesses. Even though PWs 1, 2, 4 and 5 deposed according to the prosecution case, PWs 6 to 10 were declared hostile as they did not fully support the prosecution story. PW3 was examined mainly to prove the criminal conspiracy said to have been placed at Hotel Chaithram owned by A2.

(3.) PW 1 is the brother -in -law of the deceased Kochukuttan. The incident happened when the deceased and PW1 were talking in front of Harisree Bakery at Veliyam junction. Evidence of PW1 cannot be discarded merely because he is the brother -in -law of the deceased. He gave Ext. P1 FI statement. In the FI statement, he had named A1 and A2. He also stated that there were 5 others also whom he can personally identify. FI statement was given without much delay and there was no time gap in making any exaggerations in the FI statement. He described before court the role of each accused in the commission of the crime. When a person is attacked by a group consisting about seven or more persons, it is difficult to remember, with exactitude, the injuries inflicted by each person or the arms carried by each of them. However, the court is bound to sift the evidence and find out the truth after eliminating the exaggerations. Evidence of PW1 clearly establish that a group consisting of A1 and A2 came and attacked the deceased in view of the previous enmity. PW2 fully support the evidence of PW1. He was also an eye witness (paragraph 11). Evidence of PWs 4 and 5, other eye witnesses, corroborates the evidence of PWs 1 and 2. Motive for the crime is also clearly proved. A case was already registered against the deceased and another for attacking A2 as can be seen from Ext. P40.