9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (4) TMI 1215X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nts immediately after the occurrence point out towards their guilt. Thus the trial court as also the High Court on the basis of the circumstantial evidence rightly came to the conclusion that the prosecution has been able to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt so far as these appellants are concerned. - CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1519 OF 2008 & APPEAL NO. 698 OF 2008 and APPEAL NO. 1808 OF 2009 - - - Dated:- 4-4-2011 - PRASAD, C.K. AND BEDI, H.S., JJ. JUDGEMENT CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD, J. 1. Altogether 8 persons were put on trial for commission of the offence under Section 302 and 201 read with Section 34 as also Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code. Accused Jaibunissa died during the trial, whereas accused Rukiya Begum, Nasre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Appellant No. 2 in the appeal filed by Nasreen and as he failed to surrender, his appeal stood dismissed. 3. Prosecution commenced on the basis of a written report given by PW-12 Thammaiah to PW-31 G.Jayaraj, the Sub-Inspector of Police in which he disclosed that while he was at his agricultural field near the land of accused Jaibunnisa, his brother-in-law PW-2 Chandrashekar @ Chandru informed him that while he was near Aralikatte, PW-1 Thandavamurthy and appellant Nasreen informed him that the dead bodies of Rasheed Sait and his wife Sabeena Sait were lying in the field. The Sub-Inspector of Police G.Jayaraj came to the place of occurrence and found trace of blood from the place of occurrence to the gate of the deceased and the accuse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rein besides other accused persons attacked Rasheed Sait and his wife Sabeena Begum and caused their death. Prosecution has alleged that in order to shield themselves from punishment the accused persons shifted the dead bodies and dismantled the motorcycle used by the deceased. 5. Police after investigation submitted charge sheet and the appellants besides four other accused persons, namely, Jaibunnisa, Mansoor, Mohammed Ghouse, and Nasarath @ Musarath @ Nasarathulla Shariff were committed to the Court of Sessions. Appellants denied to have committed any offence and claimed to be tried. There is no eye-witness to the occurrence and the prosecution sought to establish the guilt against all the accused persons, including the appellants by c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e State. It has been submitted by the counsel representing appellants Rukia Begum and Nasreen that the circumstantial evidence brought against them do not conclusively point towards their guilt and, therefore, the HighCourt erred in reversing the well considered judgment of acquittal of the trial court. They point out that the strained relationship between these appellants and their brother Rasheed Sait does not necessarily lead towards the guilt of these appellants. Recovery of day to day articles i.e., bucket and plastic pot also do not point out towards their guilt. It has been pointed out that the High Court while convicting these two appellants has not relied on the recovery. Ms. Anitha Shenoy, however, submits that two sisters, i.e., ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er reinforced by acquittal of the accused by the trial court. The view of the trial Judge as to the credibility of the witness must be given proper weight and consideration. There must be compelling and weighty reason for the High Court to come to a conclusion different than that of the trial court. The view taken by the trial court was justified in the facts and circumstances of the case and a possible view and, therefore in our opinion, the High Court erred in setting aside their acquittal. 9. The case of appellant Issaq Sait and Mujahid in our opinion, however, stands on altogether different footing. The trial court has held them guilty. There is overwhelming evidence to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that they shared the motive wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the guilt on the basis of the circumstantial evidence the prosecution has to establish that the circumstances proved lead to one and the only conclusion towards the guilt of the accused. In a case based on circumstantial evidence the circumstances from which an inference of guilt is sought to be drawn are to be cogently and firmly established. The circumstances so proved must unerringly point towards the guilt of the accused. It should form a chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that the crime was committed by the accused and none else. It has to be considered within all human probability and not in fanciful manner. In order to sustain conviction circumstantial evidence must be complete and incapable of explanation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
