IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI THURSDAY, THE 19TH JUNE 2008 / 29TH JYAISHTA 1930 CRL.A.No. 1050 of 2005(C) ------------------------- SC.628/2003 of SESSIONS COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA CP.57/2000 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-II,PATHANAMTHITTA .................... APPELLANT: ----------- ANTONY @ THANKACHAN, S/O.THOMAS, C.NO.8794, CENTRAL PRISON, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-12. BY ADV. . SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE RESPONDENT: ------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ----------------------------------------- CRL.APPEAL NO. 1050 OF 2005 ----------------------------------------- Dated 19th June, 2008. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The accused in S.C. No.628/2003 of the Sessions Court, Pathanamthitta is the appellant. He has been convicted for the offence under Section 302 of the I.P.C and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs.25,000/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two years,. 2. The prosecution case in brief is as follows: The appellant Antoney @ Thankachan is the husband of the deceased Gracy. Their marriage took place in 1971. A boy and a girl were born in the wedlock. The girl was given in marriage in 1993. Thereafter, the deceased and her son were living in a house at Thykkattumuri in Koyipuram Village. The son later died. The land where the deceased was residing was purchased with the help of her erstwhile employer. The house was constructed with the aid of the Y.M.C.A. There were frequent quarrels in the marital life of the accused and CRA 1050/2005 2 the deceased. At the time of occurrence, the accused was living separately with his second wife Santha. But, he was occasionally visiting the house of the deceased and threatening and manhandling her, demanding to convey the house and property to his name. So, she filed Exts.P6 and P7 complaints before the police officers. Because of the ill-will generated by that action, the accused came to the residence of the deceased on 14.7.2000 and hit her with a stone weighing about 5 Kgms. She was also attacked using a chopper. She succumbed to the injuries. After the incident the accused abused the neighbours and went away. He also confessed to PW6, an autorickshaw driver that he has finished his wife Gracy. The accused was arrested on 18.7.2000. The crime was registered by the S.I of Police on the information lodged by PW3. PW17, the C.I of Police took over the investigation of the crime. He conducted the inquest and arrested the accused on 18.7.2000. On the basis of the confession made by the accused, the shirt and double dothi worn by him at the time of commission of the offence, which he kept in a plastic cover on the ceiling of his residential hut were recovered under a mahazar. PW17 questioned the witnesses, completed the investigation and laid the charge before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court II, Pathanamthitta. The learned Magistrate committed the case as per C.P.No.57/2000 to the Sessions Court. CRA 1050/2005 3 3. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge framed against him under Section 302 of the I.P.C., by the Sessions Court. From the side of the prosecution, Pws.1 to 17 were examined and Exts.P1 to P23 were marked. Material objects M.Os.1 to 9 were also produced. After hearing both sides, the trial court found the appellant guilty of the offence under Section 302 of the I.P.C and imposed the punishments mentioned earlier. The aggrieved appellant has preferred this appeal from the jail. 4. We heard the learned counsel Sri.Grashious Kuriakose, who appeared for the appellant before us. He submitted that there is no evidence on record to connect the appellant with the crime. The witnesses, who were supposed to speak about the presence of the accused at the scene of occurrence at the relevant time, have turned hostile. Apart from the official witnesses, only PW4 supported the prosecution. She is the daughter of the deceased. Her evidence would show that there were frequent quarrels between her parents and her mother had complained twice before the police concerning the harassment from the part of the appellant. The recovery of the dress worn by the accused at the time of commission of the offence was made by PW17. But, as evident from Ext.P22, the report of the Chemical Analyst, there were no blood stains on the shirt or the double dothi worn by him and recovered under Ext.P12 mahazar. The learned counsel for the CRA 1050/2005 4 appellant, therefore, prayed for acquitting the appellant. 5. We heard the learned Public Prosecutor for the State also. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellant, there is no evidence on record to support the case of the prosecution. What is proved through PW4 and Exts.P6 and P7 complaints filed by the deceased before the police officers, is that there were frequent quarrels between the appellant and the deceased and their marital life was not cordial. The quarrels have reached a point of making complaints by the wife before the police also. The above fact is proved by the deposition of PW4 and the official witnesses. It is also not in dispute that the death of Gracy is homicidal. But, the previous enmity between the appellant and the deceased is not sufficient to hold that it was he who committed the offence. Except the suspicion that the estranged husband may be behind the murder of the deceased, there is no iota of evidence to connect the appellant with the crime. We are clearly of the view that the learned Sessions Judge wrongly convicted and sentenced the appellant. In the result, the appeal is allowed. The conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of the I.P.C is set aside. He shall be set at CRA 1050/2005 5 liberty forthwith, if his detention is not required in connection with any other case. 19th June, 2008. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. Nm/