TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2002 (4) TMI 937
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ions Judge, Ernakulam in Sessions Case No.128 of 1996. The case is based on circumstantial evidence. According to the prosecution the deceased had been working for PW-28 at his farm and in that connection he used to leave his house at 7.00 a.m. everyday and would return in the evening but sometimes he stayed back at the farm. He had been residing with his younger brother PW-3 and a younger sister, PW-7. On 28.6.1995, as usual, he left for his work at 7.00 a.m. At the time of leaving his house, PW-3 and PW-7 had seen him putting on two gold rings and a watch. PW-28 had also noticed him putting on the above said articles. Till mid-day he was at the farm of PW-28 and after having his lunch etc. he had left the place. At about 4.00 p.m., PW-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dy. During the course of investigation, PW-29 came to know that accused had pledged a gold ring with PW-19 which led to the arrest of the appellant on 5.7.1995 at Kottapuram toddy shop. The accused led the police party to rubber plantation of one Jose Verghese and handed over M.O.1 (watch) in respect of which recovery memo was prepared Ex.P-6. He also took the police party to his house from where he produced document in token of the pledge of M.O.II (a) (the other ring) with a private banker. Thus the other gold ring was recovered from the shop of PW-24. The accused denied the charge and took up the defence that PW-3 namely, the brother of the deceased and other members of the family were unhappy with him and therefore he has been falsel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ody. 7. On the arrest of the accused on 5.7.1995 watch was recovered at his instance. Yet another witness who has stated about it is PW15 who said that he had also heard the shouts and he saw somebody lying who looked like the deceased and somebody looking like the accused was standing near a culvert. His statement was recorded by the Investigating Officer on 6.7.1995. The High Court has observed that much reliance could not be placed upon his evidence. We feel such evidence could not be of any help to the prosecution. We find that the evidence of the prosecution witnesses in support of the circumstances enumerated above could not be assailed on behalf of the appellant. The case as put forward by the appellant in defence also has n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....th PW-19 on 1.7.95. The possession of the articles which had been duly identified by the witnesses as belonging to the deceased were found in his possession within less than 24 hours of the incident. It would lead to inference under Section 114 (a) of the Evidence Act that the appellant has himself committed the robbery , an offence punishable under Section 392 IPC. According to the statement of PWs 10, 12 and 13 deceased had been saying "take whatever you want leave me alone", shows that he must have been under some apprehension or threat thereof. So far the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC is concerned, the High Court has placed reliance upon a decision reported in AIR 1978 S.C. 522 Baiju versus State of Madhya Pradesh....