MADURAI: The Madras high court has confirmed the conviction and life sentenced imposed on a man who murdered a 11-year-old boy in Thanjavur district in 2017.
Kishore, 11, a resident of Pappa Nagar Extension II was playing hide-and-seek along with his friends in a playground near his house on September 23, 2017. Since Kishore did not return home in the evening, his mother started to search for him. As she was not able to find him, she lodged a complaint based on which the Tamil University police registered a boy missing case the next day.
The breakthrough in this case came when Viswanath surrendered and confessed before the VAO Thangavel on September 26, 2017. Viswanath, a diploma holder who was unemployed said that he is a resident of the same locality. Few days back when Vishwanath was having a smoke behind the compound wall of the playground, Kishore came and hid behind him. Viswanath asked Kishore why he was coming and hiding there when he himself was hiding for a smoke.
Kishore abused him in foul language. Feeling irritated and infuriated, Viswanath held Kishore by the back of his neck and pressed it. Kishore struggled to get himself free, but soon he fainted and fell down. When he tried to wake up Kishore, he found him lifeless. So, he stealthily carried Kishore to a vacant plot adjacent to his house, dug a pit with a mattock and buried him. Thereafter, while Kishore’s parents were searching for him, Viswanath also joined in the search. Since police were inquiring and fearing that he might get caught, Viswanath surrendered.
Police altered the boy missing case to Sections 302 (murder) and 201 (causing disappearance of evidence of offence, or giving false information to screen offender) of IPC. In 2019, the I additional district court in Thanjavur convicted and sentenced Viswanath to undergo life imprisonment under Section 302 of IPC. Challenging the same, Viswanath (appellant) filed the present criminal appeal.
A division bench of justice P N Prakash and justice R Hemalatha observed that in this case, they have no good reasons to disbelieve the evidence of VAO Thangavel to whom the appellant had given the extrajudicial confession statement. The appellant has not suggested any motive to the prosecution witnesses for falsely implicating him in this case.
“When the body of the boy has been exhumed from the place that was pointed out by the appellant, then under Section 106 of the Evidence Act, the onus is on the appellant to show how he knew that the body was buried there,” observed the judges.
Observing that there are no merits in this appeal, the judges said that the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial court warrant no interference. Hence, the judges dismissed the appeal.
