Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Balakrishnan Nair, J.

The accused 1 and 5 in S.C.No.87/97 of the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Alappuzha are the appellants in Criminal Appeal No.297/2005. The accused 2 to 4 in the very same Sessions Case are the appellants in Criminal Appeal No.298/2005. Since both the appeals are directed against the very same judgment, they are heard and disposed of by this common judgment.

2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows: The accused 1 to 5 along with 20 other accused were charge-sheeted by the Circle Inspector of Police, Alappuzha, for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 148, 302, 307 and 324 read with Section 149 of the I.P.C. According to the prosecution, the accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly with a common object to murder Baiju and PW2. To achieve the above common object, the members of that unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapons attacked Baiju and PW2 at about 3.30 p.m. on 17.1.1994. The place of occurrence was the courtyard of house No.504 known as Vavakkadu house in Ward No.XIII of Mararikulam South Panchayat in Pathirappally Village. The accused were harbouring previous enmity towards Baiju, PW2 and others, for their role in obstructing a 'Ganamela' which was held in May, 1993 in Amalotbhava Kurisupura at Omanappuzha, which is a place near Alappuzha beach. On 17.1.1994 at about 3.30 p.m. when the deceased and PW2 came for tapping coconut trees in the property of Joseph Kocheekkaran, which is situated on the north of Vavakkadu house, the accused surrounded them from all the four sides and attacked them using sickle, chopper, iron rod, iron pipe, sticks, cycle chain etc. Mr.Baiju was hit on the head by the 1st accused using a glyricidia stick. Thereupon, he fell down and he was attacked by the other accused using the deadly weapons in their hands. PW2 tried to rescue him by waving his knife used for tapping coconut trees. But, he was attacked by the mob and he took refuge in the near-by house. That house was belonging to PW3 Selin. Though, Selin attempted to prevent the attack, the accused stormed into the house and brutally attacked PW3 also. Under the belief that both were dead, the mob went away.

24. We notice that PW2 was a person who was attacked by the mob. He was grievously hurt. The following injuries were sustained by him as evident from Ext.P24 wound certificate issued by the Doctor, PW19.

"1. Incised wound 15.5.cm over the anterior lateral aspect of right elbow extending to the back of elbow cutting muscles, bone deep and bone cortex is cut, radial nerve is cut and partial injury to nerve.
14. Another inverted 'V' shaped abarsion over the back of the left shoulder."

He narrowly escaped death. So, he has, normally, no reason to shield the actual culprits and implicate the innocent persons falsely. Baiju, the deceased was his friend. The very same mob which attacked PW2 was responsible for the death of Baiju. The mob turned against him when he tried to rescue Baiju. Normally, PW2 has also no reason to shield the actual assailants of his friend Baiju and implicate innocent persons. So, the version of PW2 regarding the infliction of injuries on him and Baiju can be believed. His evidence cannot be discarded for the reason that he is a friend of Baiju. We notice that the medical evidence regarding the injuries sustained by Baiju and PW2 corroborate his version. Reghu, who admitted PW2 in the hospital has stated to the Doctor, PW19, regarding the history of the wound which is noticed in Ext.P24, as due to the attack by a mob using axe, chopper etc. Mr.Reghu is not a witness, who saw the incident. Apparently, he gave the statement before the Doctor, based on some information received by him. Though, axe was not used for attacking the injured, the statement regarding the incident, place and time corroborate the prosecution case. This is a contemporaneous statement recorded by the Doctor. Further, the injury on the three fingers of PW1, which is supported by Ext.P26 wound certificate, would also, to certain extent, corroborate the case of the prosecution. The history of the wound given in Ext.P26 is that when PW2 was being attacked by A2 using a sickle, she tried to prevent it and in that process she sustained injury at 3.30 p.m. on 17.1.1994 near the house of Benjamin (PW6). While PW1 was examined, she feigned ignorance, as to who inflicted the injury on her fingers. Obviously, she was trying to help the accused. It is inherently improbable that a person will not remember the person who caused a cut injury on her three fingers. Her claim is against normal human conduct.