Contradictions In Eyewitness Accounts And Suppression Of Crucial Evidence Weaken The Prosecution's Case: Telangana High Court High Court of Sikkim Sets Aside Trial Court’s Decision on Maintainability of Suit: Preliminary Issues Must Be Purely of Law Courts Must Focus on Substance Over Procedure, Says High Court Writ Petitions Against Civil Court Orders Must Be Under Article 227: Patna High Court Reiterates Jurisdictional Boundaries Kerala High Court Upholds Eviction, Rejects Sub-Tenant's Kudikidappu Claim Contractual Employment Does Not Confer Right to Regularization: Jharkhand High Court Divorced Wife Entitled to Maintenance Under Domestic Violence Act for Past Domestic Violence: Bombay High Court Tenants Cannot Prescribe How Landlords Utilize Their Property: Delhi High Court Validates Eviction Labour Commissioner to Decide Petitioner’s Date of Birth Claim within Three Months, Ensuring Proper Verification and Consideration of Evidence: Uttarakhand High Court Concealment of Health Condition and False Allegations Amount to Cruelty: Gujarat High Court Upholds Divorce Decree Judicial Proceedings Cannot Be Instituted After Four Years: MP High Court in Quashing FIR Against Retired Engineer Orissa High Court Invalidates Lecturer Recruitment Advertisements for Non-Compliance with UGC Standards Public Interest Jurisdiction Not a Substitute for Private Litigation: Karnataka High Court Declines PIL Cognizance under Section 188 IPC is illegal without a public servant’s complaint:Kerala High Court Juvenile Justice Act Prevails Over Recruitment Rules: Madras High Court Rules Juvenile Records Cannot Bar Employment in Police Services" Calcutta High Court Quashes MR Distributorship Selection Due to Irregularities in Godown Compliance and Selection Process Once the driver has established the validity of his license, the insurer cannot escape liability without conclusive proof to the contrary: J&K HC Belated Claims Cannot Be Entertained: Kerala High Court Overturns CAT Decision on Date of Birth Correction DNA Tests Cannot Supersede Established Legal Presumptions: Himachal Pradesh HC Section 26E of SARFAESI Act Overrides VAT Act: Secured Creditor's Charge Has Priority Over State's Tax Dues: Gujrat High Court High Court of Delhi Clarifies Jurisdiction in Commercial Dispute: 'Procedural Efficiency Must Be Upheld Power Under Section 319 CrPC Cannot Be Exercised Without Prima Facie Case Beyond Contradictions: Supreme Court Motive Alone Insufficient for Conviction Without Corroboration: Supreme Court Supreme Court Ensures Equal Financial Benefits for All High Court Judges: Discrimination Based on Recruitment Source Struck Down Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Four Accused: Cites Contradictory Dying Declarations and Lack of Independent Evidence in Murder Case Evidence Corroborates Violent Robbery and Recovery of Stolen Articles: Calcutta High Court Upholds Conviction in Burrabazar Dacoity Case Failure to Implead Contesting Candidates is Fatal; Fundamental Defect Cannot Be Cured: Bombay High Court Dismisses Election Petition Magistrate Not Functus Officio Post-Final Order in Maintenance Cases: Allahabad High Court Substantial Questions of Law a Must in Second Appeals, Reiterates Andhra Pradesh High Court Inconsistencies and Procedural Lapses: Allahabad High Court Acquits Four in Neeta Singh Murder Case

No Mother Would Unnecessarily Implicate Her Own Son": Kerala High Court Upholds Murder Conviction in Fratricide, Acquits on Criminal Trespass

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Kerala High Court has confirmed Anilkumar's conviction for the murder of his brother, Sunil Kumar, under IPC Sections 302 and 201, emphasizing the mother's testimony as pivotal. The conviction under Section 449 for criminal trespass was set aside.

The judgment centered on the nuances of Sections 302 (murder) and 201 (causing disappearance of evidence) of the IPC in a fratricide context, while also addressing the inapplicability of Section 449 (criminal trespass).

The case involved a lethal dispute between brothers over a rope, leading to Anilkumar stabbing Sunil Kumar. The court grappled with issues around eyewitness credibility and the specific IPC sections relevant to murder, evidence tampering, and criminal trespass.

The High Court's assessment leaned heavily on the testimony of family members, particularly the mother (PW5), whose account was deemed both natural and credible. The dying declaration of the victim was a crucial element, found admissible under the Evidence Act.

Medical and forensic evidence played a corroborative role, aligning with the eyewitnesses' narrative and establishing the fatal nature of the chest injury inflicted. Despite recognizing a motive rooted in a trivial dispute, the court noted the absence of premeditation in the crime.

The court carefully distinguished between culpable homicide and murder, ultimately categorizing the act under "murder" as defined in Section 300 thirdly of the IPC, due to the intentional infliction of a fatal injury.

On the charge under Section 201 of IPC, evidence supported the finding that Anilkumar attempted to erase evidence by cleaning the murder weapon. However, the court acquitted him of the criminal trespass charge under Section 449, as the crime scene was a shared familial space, thus negating unlawful entry.

Decision: The court upheld Anilkumar's conviction for murder and evidence tampering but acquitted him of criminal trespass. The appeal was partially allowed.

Date of Decision: 15th March 2024

Anilkumar vs. State of Kerala

Similar News