Kerala High Court Judgments June 2025

Evidence Act, 1872 – Sections 3, 6, 8, 27 – Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 302, 307, 392, 397, 449 – The appellant, convicted for house trespass, robbery, attempt to murder, and murder, challenged the conviction, contending that the evidence was insufficient to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence, including eyewitness testimonies, forensic reports, and recovered material objects. The court held that the chain of circumstances—comprising the presence of the appellant’s hair, bloodstains of the deceased and injured on his clothes, and recovery of the murder weapon—conclusively established guilt. The court rejected the argument that the fatal injury to the deceased was not caused by the appellant, finding sufficient evidence of intent for murder under Section 302. The claim for Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC was dismissed due to the absence of sudden quarrel or heat of passion. The disclosure statement leading to the recovery of the weapon was inadmissible under Section 27 of the Evidence Act but admissible as subsequent conduct under Section 8. The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction and life imprisonment sentence were upheld. Biju Molla v. State of Kerala, 18 June 2025 | 2025 KER 42853 : 2025 (6) KLR 181 : 2025 KLT OnLine 2144