Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

18. P.W. 10 (Ramesh Kumar) is the Village Officer of Muttambalam Village. He proved Ext. P7 scene plan prepared by him on 9-11-2005 on the strength of Ext.P5 scene mahazar.

19. P.W.11 (K.R. Muraleedharan) who was the Sub Inspector of Kottayam Police Station registered Ext.P1 (a) First Information Report on the strength of Ext. P1 F.I. statement given by P.W.1. The case was initially registered under the caption "unnatural death" under Sec. 174 Cr.P.C. and the F.I.R. was forwarded to the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Kottayam. He also held inquest over the dead body of the deceased from 7 a.m. to 10.15 a,m. on 23-08-2005 as revealed by Ext. P8 inquest report. MOs 5 to 11 were seized under the said inquest report. He thereupon gave Ext.P9 report for adding Sec. 302 I.P.C. and to transmit Ext.P1 F.I.R. to J.F.C.M. Kottayam since the case according to him revealed the offence of murder.

23. After a careful re-appraisal of the oral and documentary evidence in the case and after hearing both sides , we are of the view that the material relied on by the court below do not unerringly establish the complicity of the appellant behind in the death of Aniappan @ Padayappa.

24. Admittedly, there is no direct occular evidence regarding the occurrence. P.W.1 is admittedly not an occurrence witness . In the case of P.W.2 all that he allegedly saw through the ventilator of the Homeo Hospital where he claims to have been admitted for disc prolapse , is the deceased running with a saree and A2 chasing him demanding her saree back and A1 following A2 and A3 and A4 standing near the bus stand. Going by Exts. P5 and 12 scene mahazras and Ext.P7 scene plan, the Nagampadam bus stand building having a length of 90 metres and width of 15 metres lies north- south with parking area for buses on either side. The occurrence allegedly took place at about 1.90 metres in front of the Lubina Cool bar belonging to P.W.1 and situated almost in the middle of the bus stand building. The evidence shows that immediately to the north-south of the place of occurrence there is a big rectangular concrete pillar. It is also in evidence that there are several such pillars in the bus stand building. According to P.W.1 there are four more stalls to the north of the place of occurrence inside the bus stand building. At about 60 metres of the north-west of the place of occurrence is a Comfort Station. Going by the evidence of P.W.1 the above Comfort Station is situated immediately to the south of the Homeo Hospital. As noted earlier, the occurrence took place soon after the midnight of 22-08-2005. Going by the topography as revealed by the scene mahazars and the scene plan it would be difficult for P.W.2 to have seen the deceased and A2 running by standing and by looking through the ventilator of the Homeo Hospital situated immediately to the north of the Comfort Station. bBoth the Comfort Station as well as the massive pillars inside the bus stand building would have obstructed his view even assuming that there was sufficient light inside the bus stand building and its vicinity. Presumably, sensing the above difficulty, it appears that the Public Prosecutor who conducted the case before the Court below produced a rough sketch during the stage of arguments. We are surprised to find that the learned Addl. Sessions Judge had no hesitation to mark the same as Ext.P20 which was not produced along with any memo or petition. Going by Ext.P20 rough sketch the Homeo Hospital is shifted from the north- western corner of the bus stand to the north eastern side in line with the place of occurrence so as to persuade the court to hold that from that position it was possible for P.W.2 to have witnessed the place of occurrence. It is not know why such a procedure was resorted to, particularly, when P.W.2 has no case that he had actually witnessed the occurrence in which the deceased sustained the fatal injuries. All that he saw was the deceased running with a saree presumably wrested from A2 (Rajamma) and A2 chasing the deceased demanding her saree back and A1 who is the husband of A2 following A2. Merely from the fact that A2 was scene chasing the deceased demanding her saree, it does not follow that A1 to 4 are behind the assassination of the deceased.