Prosecution Failed to Prove Homicide: Kerala High Court Acquits Three in Murder Case

Conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC overturned due to lack of proof on causality of death and inadmissibility of dying declarations.

The Kerala High Court has overturned the conviction of three individuals in a high-profile murder case, citing insufficient evidence to establish causality and the inadmissibility of purported dying declarations. The bench, comprising Justices P.B. Suresh Kumar and M.B. Snehalatha, delivered the judgment on May 30, 2024, acquitting the accused who had been sentenced to life imprisonment by the trial court.

The case revolved around the death of Jayaraj alias Rajesh, who sustained severe injuries on November 27, 2011, and succumbed on May 5, 2012. The prosecution alleged that the accused, Babu (44), Aneesh (22), and Pradeep alias Kannan (37), attacked the victim with a chopper due to familial enmity. The trial court had found them guilty under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced them to life imprisonment along with a fine.

Credibility of Medical Evidence: The court noted the prosecution's failure to conclusively establish the cause of death. While the victim sustained injuries on November 27, 2011, he died almost six months later. The prosecution did not adequately prove that the death was a direct result of the injuries from the attack. The absence of a substantiated post-mortem report further weakened the prosecution's case.

Witness Testimonies: Most of the key witnesses, including relatives and friends of the victim, turned hostile and did not support the prosecution's narrative. The court highlighted the inconsistencies in witness testimonies and the failure of the prosecution to establish a coherent chain of events linking the accused to the crime.

The bench focused extensively on the admissibility of dying declarations. The trial court had relied heavily on the victim's statement to police officers while being transported to the hospital and a subsequent statement recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. However, the High Court ruled these statements inadmissible under Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act, as the prosecution failed to prove that the statements were made in anticipation of death or related to the circumstances leading to the death.

Justice M.B. Snehalatha remarked, "The prosecution has miserably failed to bring on record by acceptable evidence the cause of the death of the deceased on 05.05.2012 or as to any of the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his death. Therefore, the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C is inadmissible as dying declaration under Section 32(1) of the Evidence Act."

The acquittal underscores the critical importance of robust and credible evidence in securing convictions, especially in serious offenses such as murder. The judgment also highlights the judiciary's scrutiny of the admissibility and reliability of evidence, including dying declarations. This decision is expected to influence the prosecution's approach in future cases, emphasizing the need for comprehensive and substantiated evidence to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Date of Decision: May 30, 2024.