Bangalore District Court
State By The Police SubInspector vs ) Adimurthy @ Murthy on 17 February, 2022
IN THE COURT OF LVII ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, MAYOHALL UNIT, BENGALURU.
(CCH58)
Present:
Smt. K.G.Shanthi, B.Com, LL.M.,
LVII Addl.City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Mayo Hall Unit, Bengaluru.
: S.C.No.1416/2012 :
Dated this the 17th day of February, 2022.
Complainant: State by the Police SubInspector,
Kothanuru Police Station,
Bangalore.
(By Public Prosecutor)
V/s
Accused: 1) Adimurthy @ Murthy,
S/o. Shivappa,
Age: 26 years,
R/at C/o. Chandranna's House,
K.Narayanapura, Kothanuru Post,
Bangalore East.
Native of: Sheetalagutta village,
Beluru Hobli, Bagepalli Taluk,
Chikkaballapura District.
(Represented by Sri.R.Radhakrishnan, Adv.)
2) Anjinappa @ Anji,
S/o. Narayanappa,
Age: 26 years,
R/at C/o. Ramanna's House,
Nagareshwara nagenahalli,
2
S.C.No.1416/2012
Kothanur Post, Bangalore.
Native of: Gudipalli village,
Pathapalaya Hobli,
Begepalli Taluk,
Chikkaballapura District. (Splitup)
TABULATION OF THE EVENTS
1. Date of Commission of offence: 20.06.2012
2. Date of report of offence : 21.06.2012
3, Name of the complainant : Sri. Lakkappa
4. Nature of offence complained : U/Sec.302 r/w. 34 of
IPC
5. Date of commencement of
recording evidence : 16.04.2015
6. Date of closing of recording of
evidence : 26.12.2018
7. Date of judgment: : 17.02.2022
8. Opinion of the Judge : Accused is acquitted
9. Duration of the case : Year/s Moth/s Day/s
09 07 28
*********
JUDGMENT
The Kothanuru Police filed the charge sheet against the accused for the offence punishable u/Ss. 302 r/w. 34 of IPC.
2. There is an allegation against the accused that the accused No.1 and 2 and deceased were working as a mason and on everyday after completion of their work they 3 S.C.No.1416/2012 used to consume liquor and playing cards 'andar bahar'. All the times the deceased Eshwara used to win the game. That on 15.06.2012 the accused No.1 pledged the ornaments of his wife and kept Rs.5,000/ for a gambling. But on that day also the deceased won the game. Again on 16.06.2012 he pledged the ear stud of his wife and kept Rs.9,000/ to involved in the gambling and on that day also deceased won the game. Even on 20.06.2012 also the accused Eshwara won the gambling. Since, the deceased always used to win the gambling and the accused were losing money, so they get annoyed against Eshwara. That on 20.06.2012 the accused No.1 and 2 with common intention to commit the murder of Eshwara, they took him to the vacant land situated near tank bund at Shivale Village and made Eshwara to drink liquor, then the accused No.1 assaulted on the face of Eshwara with eucalyptus stick and when Eshwara fallen, the accused No.2 took the size stone (ಸಸಸಜಜ ಕಲಜಲ) and assaulted on the head of Eshwara 2 to 3 times and thereby committed the murder. Then, took Rs.7,500/ from the possession of the 4 S.C.No.1416/2012 deceased and thereby committed the offence punishable u/s 302 r/w sec. 34 IPC.
3. In this regard, Sri.Lakkappa lodged a complaint to the Police on 21.06.2012 at 08.10 hours. The police on receipt of complaint registered the FIR against this accused for the offence punishable U/Sec.302 IPC and proceeded with the investigation.
4. During the course of investigation the Police have visited the spot and drawn the Spot Mahazar and taken steps to conduct the Postmortem on the dead body of the deceased. Inquest Mahazar conducted in the presence of panchas. Further Statement of complainant and other witnesses recorded. Then on completion of investigation, filed a charge sheet against the accused for the offence punishable U/Sec.302 r/w. 34 IPC. As per charge sheet CW1 is the complainant and assisted for the Spot Mahazar, CW2 and CW3 are the Spot Mahazar witnesses, CW4 is the owner of the house, wherein the deceased was residing and accused & deceased were 5 S.C.No.1416/2012 working together. CW5 to CW10 are the panchas for seizure of material objects. CW11 and CW12 speaks about the accused and deceased were playing cards and they were working as Mason. CW13 to CW15 were speaks about the purchase of liquor. CW16 is the witness speaks regarding purchase of the liquor by the accused No.2. CW17 and CW18 speaks about the pledging of ornaments by the accused No.1. CW19 to CW27 identified the dead body. CW28 to CW32 are the Inquest Mahazar witnesses. CW34 and CW35, they issued RTC and Mutation Extract of the place of occurrence. CW36 is the Doctor, who conducted the Postmortem. CW37 is an expert, who collected the articles from the spot. CW38 is the Engineer, who prepared the sketch of the spot. CW39 to CW41, who apprehended the accused, CW42, CW43, CW44, CW45 are Police officials, who assisted the I.O. CW46 is the Police Inspector, who registered the FIR, arrested the accused and collected the evidence. CW47 is the Police Inspector, who filed a charge sheet against the accused. 6
S.C.No.1416/2012
5. On filing of the charge sheet the learned Magistrate has committed the case to the Prl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore and in turn the Prl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore made over this case to this court for trial. Accused No.1 is in J.C., then bail is granted in Criminal Petition No.3595/2013 dtd.24.07.2013 and accused No.1 released on bail. Later the accused No.1 not appeared before the court and not secured under warrant. Hence, proclamation issued and accused secured on 17.01.2022, since then he is in J.C. Since the Advocate who was on record retired after conclusion of evidence, free legal assistance given to the accused.
6. Heard before charge. Since there are primafacie material to frame charge against accused, charges framed, read over and explained to the accused. Accused pleaded not guilty and claims to be tried.
7. In order to establish the case of the prosecution, prosecution examined PW1 to PW29 and got marked the documents Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.53 and material objects M.O.1 to M.O.34 marked.
7
S.C.No.1416/2012
8. After completing the evidence of the prosecution, Statement of accused u/Sec. 313 of Cr.P.C recorded. All the incriminating evidence have been read over and explained to the accused and he denied all the incriminating evidence.
9. Heard arguments.
10. The points arise for my consideration are:
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that on 20.06.2012 the accused No.1 and 2 with common intention to commit the murder of Eshwara took him to tank bund at Shivale village and made Eshwara to drink liquor, then the accused No.1 assaulted on the face of Eshwara with eucalyptus stick and when Eshwara fallen, the accused No.2 took the size stone (ಸಸಸಜಜ ಕಲಜಲ) and assaulted on the head of Eshwara 2 to 3 times and thereby committed the murder. Then, took Rs.7,500/ from the possession of the deceased and thereby committed the offence punishable U/Sec. 302 r/w sec. 34 IPC?
2. What order?
11. My findings on the above points are as under:
Point No.1 : In the Negative,
Point No.2 : As per the final order for
the following:
8
S.C.No.1416/2012
REASONS
12. Point No.1: It is a burden on the prosecution to prove that the accused committed offence U/Sec.302 r/w. 34 IPC beyond all reasonable doubt. In order to prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined the witnesses PW1 to 29.
13. PW1 deposed that he is running Goat Rearing Center at Thirumenahalli. He deposed that he know the accused who were working under him. He deposed that Smt.Munirathnamma and Sri.Ramappa also working with him. One day in the year 2012 he went to North Karnataka for searching coolie and he met Eshwara at Batni bus stop and came to know that he know Mason work. Hence, he asked him to join and Eshwara agreed and tell that he will come after 45 days along with other workers. But, he came alone and said that he will do the mason work along with the workers available here. So, this witness provided a room attached to his work for the stay of Eshwara. Accordingly he was doing mason work by taking labours. 9
S.C.No.1416/2012 Smt.Munirathnamma and Sri.Ramaiah also joined for work with Eshwara.
14. He deposed that after some days the accused persons joined Eshwara and playing cards and consuming liquor. He deposed that on 20.06.2012 he went outside to attend the family function and returned at 1100 pm. By that time the accused persons taken Eashwara in a Suzuki motor cycle. On the next day morning at 9 am smt. Munirathamma and Sri. Ramaiah came and informed that Eshwara not found. Hence, he called to the phone of Eshwara, but it was not reachable. He thought that Eshwara might have consumed liquor and lying, hence, he went on searching Eshwara and came to know that one dead body was lying near Bilai Temple. He went there and identified the dead body of Eshwara then informed to the police. Since, he saw that the accused person taking Eshwara in a motor cycle, he suspected on them that they might have committed the murder of Eshwara. 10
S.C.No.1416/2012
15. He deposed that he saw the blood stained club and blood stained stone in the spot. He identified the motor cycle in which the accused person taken Eshwara on the alleged date. Motor cycle is marked as M.O.1, club is marked is marked as M.O.2 and stone is marked as M.O.3.
16. PW2 and 3 are the mahazar witnesses. PW2 deposed that his land is situated in Sy.No.71 and on 20.06.2012 he went to his land for cultivation. On the next day at about 630 am, he noticed the dead body, one stone, mobile near to his land. The dead body was fully blood stained. Then he informed to the police. Police came to the spot at 830 am and drawn the mahazar and obtained the signature. Then, they conducted the inquest on the dead body. He deposed that police have recorded his statement and obtained his signature. The complaint is marked as Ex.P1 and signature of the witness is marked as P1(a). He further deposed that police have drawn the spot mahazar as per Ex.P2 and obtained his signature. The signature of the witness is marked as Ex.P2(a). He also deposed that 11 S.C.No.1416/2012 police have seized the slippers, blood stained club, leaf, mobile and clothes of the deceased. He also deposed that in the place there was a mark of running the motor cycle. The clothes are identified by the witness and marked as M.O.4 to 6 and motor cycle. He identified the M.O.1 and 2 and also deposed that the age of the deceased is about 32 35 years.
17. PW3 in his evidence deposed that in the year 2012 police have called him to the land of Lakkappa (PW2) and police have drawn the mahazar in between 11 to 12 pm and obtained his signature which is marked as Ex.P2(b). He deposed that Sri.Lakkappa and Sri.Kempanna are also present. He deposed that the police have taken the hairs from the hands of the dead body, collected the soils from the spot. He identified the hairs which kept in two box and marked as M.O.7 and 8. The blood sample, soil stained on the dead body, sample soil, wooden beads were collected by the police in the spot. This witness identified material objects and marked as M.O.9 to 12. He deposed that mahazar drawn in between 12 noon to 130 pm. 12 S.C.No.1416/2012
18. PW4 deposed that on 28.06.2012 at about 300 pm Kothanur police have called him to the police station and he saw the accused persons in the police station. He further deposed that police have stated that they intend to seize some articles. Accordingly, they have seized the pawn broker assets, one Nokia Mobile, Rs.1620/ from the accused Vedamurthy and also seized Rs.840/ from the another accused. He deposed that those pawn receipts belongs to Prakash Jewellers and Mataji Jewellers and he identified the two receipts and one Nokia Mobile phone which are marked as MO13 to 15. He deposed that after seizure police have drawn the mahazar and read over to him. Then, he signed on the document. He identified the accused No.1 and 2 before the court.
19. PW5 deposed that he is working as a cable operator. He deposed that about 3 and half years back Kothanur Police called him to the police station and went to the police station at 300 pm and saw the accused persons in the police station. The police have searched the 13 S.C.No.1416/2012 pocket of Adimurthy and took two receipts with respect to the gold, one Nokia Mobile and Rs.600/. Then they searched the accused Anjanappa and took Rs.840/. They drawn the mahazar and obtained the signature which are marked as Ex.P3(a).
20. PW6 Smt.Munirathnamma deposed that the accused are the sons of her sister. She deposed that she do not know when the accused persons are going for work and returned from work. She also deposed that she do not know the deceased Eshwara. Further deposed that she do not know anything about the case and deposed that she has not given statement before the police.
21. PW7 is the wife of the deceased deposed that about 5 years back one Mr.Vinodhkumar taken her husband for agricultural work to a village situated about 70 Kms from Bengaluru. She deposed that about 6 persons committed the murder of her husband about 4 years back. She deposed that she saw these accused in the police station and came to know that these two accused are 14 S.C.No.1416/2012 among 6 persons. She deposed that at the time of murder of her husband she was residing in her parents house at Nagasandra, Gadag and she came to know the death of her husband through her nephew. The police have informed to her nephew Mr.Basavaraj through phone informing that her husband died. So, all of them came to Bengaluru and identified the dead body of her husband in the mortuary of Ambedkar Hospital.
22. PW8 deposed that deceased Eshwara is his uncle. He further deposed that on 28062012 police Inspector Sri.Purushotam called him through phone and informed that there was a murder of Eshwara. Hence, he along with his elders came to Bengaluru and saw the dead body in the mortuary of the hospital. After cremation police informed that the accused persons are apprehended and asked him to come to the police station. Hence, he went to Kothanur police station and police have shown the accused Adimurthy and Anjinappa. He identified the accused persons before the court.
15
S.C.No.1416/2012
23. PW9 is the doctor who conducted the postmortem on the dead of deceased Eshwara. He deposed that on 22062012 at the request of Kothanur Police he conducted the postmortem of Eshwara in between 130 pm to 230 pm and noticed the following injuries.
1. Laceration present over the right side of the nose measuring 5 cm x 1 cm x bone depth.
2. Conduced laceration present over the right fore eye measuring 6 cm x 4 cm x bone deep.
3. Laceration present over the left side of the top forehead measuring 8 cm x 5 cm x bone depth.
4. Laceration present over the middle forehead measuring 6 cm x 4 cm x bone depth.
5. Laceration present over the top of head measuring 5 cm x 4 cm x bone depth.
6. Laceration present over the back of head measuring 3 cm x 2 cm x bone depth.
7. Laceration present over the right side of the head measuring 5 cm x 4 cm x bone depth.
8. Laceration present over the left ear measuring 2.5 cm x 1.5 cm x involving full thickness of cartilage.
9. Contused abrasion present over the right cheek measuring 6 cm x 4 cm.
10. Grafted abrasion present over the right side of neck measuring 6 cm x 3 cm.
16
S.C.No.1416/2012
24. He also deposed that on examination of his scull there was a fracture and bleeding. In the brain there was a bleeding and brain was damaged. He had given an opinion that all the injuries are antimortem and fresh in nature. He deposed that those injuries may be caused with blunt edged weapon. He also given an opinion that the death was due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of head injuries sustained.
25. This witness deposed that at the time of postmortem he collected the clothes of the deceased and handed over to the I.O. That on 29062012 he received a requisition from the I.O along with the accused by name Adimurthy @ Murthy and Anjanappa @ Anjira. He examined those persons and collected the blood and hairs and sealed the same then handed over to the sealed articles to I.O along with the report. The reports are marked as Ex.P.6 and 7.
26. That on 17072012 he received a requisition from the IO along with the weapon and called the report. 17
S.C.No.1416/2012 He examined the weapon and given a report that the injuries found on the head of the dead body may be caused with the weapon he examined and also it may be caused with size stone (ಸಸಸಜಜ ಕಲಜಲ). The opinion of the Doctor is marked as Ex. P8 and signature of the witness marked as Ex. P8(a). Further he deposed that on examination of the size stone he sealed the same and returned to the I.O. The size stone marked as M.O.3. He deposed that if this stone put on the head of any person, the injuries mentioned in the report may be caused and it leads to death of the person.
27. PW10, 11, 12, 13 and 16 are an inquest mahazar witnesses. They deposed that they signed on the inquest mahazar near Bili Temple. The signatures of the witnesses marked Ex.P.13(a), 13 (b) and 13 (c). But, PW16 deposed that police have not conducted the inquest mahazar in his presence and he has not given the statement before the police as per Ex.P16. 18
S.C.No.1416/2012
28. PW14 is BBMP Engineer. He deposed that in the year 2012 he was working as a Assistant Engineer at Hoodi Sub Division. At the request of Kothanur police on 0108 2012 he prepared the sketch of the place where murder was committed. Sketch is marked as Ex. P14 and signature of the witness is marked as Ex.P14(a).
29. PW15 is Head Constable deposed that on 1107 2012 he along with PC 9831 taken the material object to FSL.
30. PW17 was the cashier of Manjunath Bar and Restaurant, Hegde Nagar. He deposed that the persons appeared through VC came to his bar on 20.06.2012 and purchased Silver Cup brandy and King Fisher Beer for Rs. 185/. He had paid Rs.200/ and after taking Rs.185/ he had returned Rs.15/ to him. He deposed that police have brought the accused and he identified him and stated before the police about 10 days back they visited his bar and he came to know that they committed the murder.
31. PW18 was Head constable deposed that on 28.06.2012 for him, CW16, Gopal, Ashwath Narayan, Arjun 19 S.C.No.1416/2012 Lamani were deputed for Patrolling duty. Accordingly, they went Noor Nagar, Narayanpura, Hegde Nagar, etc., and about 230 pm they reached near Army College, Nagenahalli and bathmidars shown that two persons to them. Hence, they apprehended those two persons and taken them to police station. He identified the accused through VC.
32. PW19 is the police Inspector. He deposed that he received the records from Police Inspector Mr. Purushotam, on verification he has submitted the charge sheet.
33. PW20 who was working as a supplier in the MSR Bar, Kothanur. He deposed that on 20.06.2012 the accused purchased the Haywards and King Fisher bottle by paying Rs.200/. He deposed that he returned Rs.5/ to him. Then on 21062012 the police came to the Bar along with 2 accused and asked him whether these two persons purchased any drinks from the bar. He also deposed that he stated before the police that they have purchased the 20 S.C.No.1416/2012 drinks from the bar. But, he deposed that he do not know why police brought those persons to the bar.
34. PW21 deposed that in the year 2012 he was working as a cashier at MSR Bar, Kothanur and PW20 working as a supplier. He deposed that on 20062012 the accused along with two others came to his bar and purchased Haywards and King Fisher bottle. After 34 days police came along with accused and shown that accused persons and asked whether they have visited the bar. He deposed that he informed to the police but he do not know why police brought him to the bar.
35. PW22 is the police inspector deposed that on 21.06.2012 at about 800 am he received the written complaint from Sri.Lakkappa as per Ex.P1 and registered the FIR as per Ex.P18. On the same day he recorded the statement of the complainant and called finger print expert and FSL expert to the spot and conducted the inquest mahazar in between 915 am to 1145 am in the presence of panchas by name Sri.Ramanjinappa, Sri.Ramachandra 21 S.C.No.1416/2012 and Sri. Byrappa as per Ex. P13. He noticed the injuries on the right side nose, right eyebrow, forehead, back side of the head, right cheek, right ear, neck and on the thigh of the dead body and noted in the inquest report. At the time of inquest he recorded the statement of Sri.Ramanna, Sri.Lakshmana. He deposed that Sri.Ramanna had given the statement as per Ex.P16.
36. On the same day in between 1200 to 130 pm he conducted the spot mahazar as per Ex.P2 as the place shown by Sri.Lakkappa and Sri.Kempanna. The FSL expert collected the hairs from the hands of the deceased, packed and sealed as article No.1 and 2. They collected the blood stains on the dead body, packed and sealed the same as article No.3. The stained soil found on the right leg also taken, packed and sealed as article No.4. sample soil collected, packed and sealed as article No.5. The slippers found in the spot also collected, packed and sealed as article No.6. He also deposed that on the left hand there was a size stone which has been seized, packed and sealed as article No.7. Eucalyptus club measuring 3 feet length found in the spot which has been 22 S.C.No.1416/2012 seized, packed and sealed as article No.8. Further collected the blood stained soil seized, packed and sealed as article No.10. One MTS mobile phone also found in the spot which has been seized, packed and sealed as article No.11. He deposed that article No.1 to 11 kept in white bag and numbered as 'K' and subjected the same under PF No.29/2012. The signature of the witness is marked as Ex.P19(a).
37. The sealed covers are opened in the open court and identified by the IO.
38. The slippers, mobile, blood stained cloth and sample soil and wooden beads (ಹಹರ), which are marked as M.O.4, 5, 9, 10 and 12. Stained soil found on the right leg of the dead body marked as M.O.16. Blood stains found on the dead which collected through cotton is marked as M.O.17. Size stone marked as M.O.3, Hair are collected from the hands of the dead body are marked as M.O.7 and 8. The photographs taken in spot marked subject to objection by the advocate for accused as Ex.P.20 to 37. 23
S.C.No.1416/2012
39. He deposed that one Mr.Naveen Kumar identified the dead body and dead body was shifted to Ambedkar Hospital. He also deposed that as per the statement given by Mr.Naveen kumar, he visited the house of the deceased and drawn the mahazar in the presence of Mr. Ambarish and Mr.P.Raja and seized 3 liquor bottles i.e. 1 small liquor bottle, 1 Super Jackie Jin, 1 Amrutha Silver Cup Brandy, 1 empty knock out beer bottle, 2 empty King Fisher liquor tin and he called the finger print experts and verified the chance print. The mahazar drawn in the house of the deceased marked as Ex.P38 and signature of the witness is marked as Ex.P.38(a). The signature of the panchas by name Sri.Ambarish and Sri.Raja are marked as Ex. P38(b) and (c). Witness Sri.Naveen who shown the spot and his signature marked as Ex.P.38(d). He deposed that he subjected the sealed liquor bottles in PF No. 30/2012. 3 empty King Fisher liquor bottles marked as MO18, 1 King Fisher bottle is marked as M.O.19, 1 empty Jackie Jin is marked as M.O.20, 1 empty Amruth Silver Cup brandy bottle is marked as M.O.21, 1 empty Knock Out beer tin is 24 S.C.No.1416/2012 marked as M.O.22, 2 empty King Fisher liquor tins marked as M.O.23.
40. He deposed that he recorded the statement of Sri.Lakkppa, Sri.Venkanna, Sri.Ambarish, Sri.Raja and Sri.Naveen kumar. With the help of owner of the house Sri.Naveen Kumar death was informed to the relatives of deceased. On 25062012 the wife of the deceased by name Smt.Kasutaravva and brother Sri.Ramesh came to mortuary of B.R.Ambedkar Medical college and identified the dead body. He recorded their statement and sent a requisition to the doctor to conduct the postmortem and to collect the blood and hair of the deceased. He recorded the statement of the relatives of the deceased by name Sri. Basavaraj, Smt.Girijavva, Sri.Hanumnthappa, Sri.Sanjeeva and friends by name Sri.Mylarappa, Sri.Mahantesh and Sri.Shivannagowda. After postmortem dead body handed over to the relatives of the deceased.
41. He further deposed that on 23.06.2012 he recorded the statement of Sri.Ramappa and 25 S.C.No.1416/2012 Smt.Munirathnamma. He deposed that Sri.Ramappa had given statement before him as per Ex. P40. He collected the hairs, blood stains and clothes of the deceased from Ambedkar hospital and subjected the same under PF No. 34/2012. The shirt of the deceased marked as M.O.4, baniyan and underwear marked as MO 25 and 26, a lungi is marked as M.O.27. On the same day he collected the postmortem report as per Ex.P.5.
42. He deposed that on 26.06.2012 he sent a requisition to the Assistant Executive Engineer, Mahadevapura Sub Division, BBMP to prepare the sketch of the spot and on 27062012 sent a requisition to Tahasildar of K.R. Puram to furnish the Survey Number of the land where the incident taken place.
43. He deposed that on 28.06.2012 he himself and his staff by name Sri.Gopal, Sri.Shivanna, Sri.Ashwathnarayana Swamy, Sri.Arjun Lambani were on patrolling duty and at about 230 pm they reached Nagenahalli and received a credible information and 26 S.C.No.1416/2012 apprehended the accused Adimurthy and Anjinappa and broght them to the police station. He deposed that in the presence of Anthony and Sri.Umesh, conducted the search of accused from the accused Adimurthy, 2 pawn receipts of Prakash Bankers and Mataji Jewelers were recovered. He further deposed that 1 Nokia mobile and Rs.1,620/ cash were recovered from accused Adimurthy. Rs.840/ seized from accused Anjinappa under mahazar Ex.P3. Pawn receipts are marked as M.O.13 and 14, mobile is marked as MO15. Cash seized under mahazar from the accused No.1 and 2 marked as M.O.28 and subjected under PF No. 36/2012.
44. He deposed that he recorded the voluntary statement of accused and at the instance of accused the clothes which worn by the accused at the time of commission of the crime, cards, 2 wheelers were seized in the presence of panchas by name Sri.Santosh and Sri. Venkatesh. The relevant portion of the voluntary statement of the accused Anjinappa is marked as Ex.P43 and 27 S.C.No.1416/2012 relevant portion from the voluntary statement of accused Adimurthy is marked as Ex. P44. He deposed that accused persons in their voluntary statement stated the the slippers and beads chain of Sri.Anjinappa was lying on the spot.
45. He deposed that accused Adimurthy produced his shirt and pant which kept in his house. The shirt marked as M.O.30, blood stain pant marked as M.O.31 which has been seized, packed in white bag and sealed as 'K'. He also deposed that the accused Anjinappa produced his black colour T shirt and blue colour Jeans pant and 52 cards which has been seized, packed in white bag and sealed as 'K'. Black T shirt marked as M.O.32, blue Jeans pant marked as M.O.33, 52 cards marked as M.O.34 and subjected the same under PF No. 37/2012. The seizure panchanama marked as Ex. P46. He deposed that panchas by name Sri. Venkatesh and Sri. Santhosh signed on the mahazar andtheir signatures are marked as Ex. P46(b) and
(c). He deposed that at the time of mahajar he had taken the photographs and recorded the statement of Sri. Umesh, 28 S.C.No.1416/2012 Sri.Anthony, Sri.Santhosh, Sri. Venkatesh and police staff. He sent the accused persons to the doctor along with PC with a request to collect the sample blood and hair of the accused.
46. He deposed that on 29.06.2012 he produced the accused before the court and taken the accused for police custody through court and on 30062012 recorded the statement of Sri.Ramesh, Smt.Kasturavva, Smt.Girijavva, Sri.Hanumanthappa, Sri.Basavaraju and witnesses Sri.Raghu, Sri.Ambarish, Sri.Dinesh and Sri.Mutturaj. On 30.06.2012 he received the hairs and blood sample of the accused from the doctor of B.R.Ambedkar Medical college and subjected the same under PF No. 38/2012.
47. On 01.07.2012 he recorded the statement of Sri. Jayanna and 02.07.2012 he seized the motor cycle based on the voluntary statement of the accused. He deposed that accused taken them to Avalahalli, Doddaballapura Road and shown the motor cycle kept under the bush. The motor cycle was seized under mahazar Ex. P49 and it is black colour Suzuki Motor Cycle, bearing No. KA01EB 29 S.C.No.1416/2012 8859. The panchas by name Sri. Babu and Sri. Kumar attested their signature on the mahazar and their signature marked as Ex.P49(b) and 49(c). The photograph of the motor cycle marked as Ex. P50. He deposed that he recorded the statement of panchas by name Sri. Babu, Sri. Kumar, Sri. Prakash and Smt. Mala. Then produced the accused before the court through staff.
48. He deposed that on 10.07.2012 he collected the RTC extracts of Sy.No.71 and the land belongs to one Sri. Murali. RTC extracts marked as Ex. P12. He deposed that on 11072012 he sent the hairs and blood samples of the accused persons to FSL. That on 17.07.2012 he sent the size stone to doctor of Ambedkar College for examination and to give report and received the report as per Ex. P8. He recorded the statement of his staff by name Sri.Manjunatha, Sri. Narasimhalu and Sri.Srinivasmurthy. On 16082012 he received the sketch of the spot as per Ex. P14. Then handed over the records to PW19 PI Mr.Naveen Kulakarni for further investigation. 30
S.C.No.1416/2012
49. PW23 deposed that he do not know who is Eshwara and deposed that he has not given any statement before the IO.
50. PW24 is the Assistant Director of FSL, Mysore. He deposed that since March 2011 to September 2014 he was working as Scientific Officer at FSL, Mysore. He deposed that on 21.06.2012 at the request of Kothanur police and also as per the direction of the Director of his Institution he visited the place of crime in Crime No. 50/2012 and noticed that two hairs each on the right and left hand of the deceased and also noticed the soil in the right leg of the deceased and sample soil. He collected the same and along with report he handed over same to Kothanur Police for further action.
51. PW25 is Head Constable deposed that he escorted the dead body and after postmortem handed over the dead body to the legal heirs of the deceased. On 24.06.2012 he collected the clothes on the dead body and 31 S.C.No.1416/2012 produced the same before the IO. On 11.07.2012 he took the material object to the FSL.
52. PW26 deposed that as per the direction of PI on 17.07.2012 he had taken the Size stone to Ambedkar Medical College. The report is marked as Ex.P8.
53. PW27 is the owner of Prakash Jewellers of Kothanur Main Road. He identified the accused No.1 and 2 through VC. He deposed that on 15.06.2012 the accused No.1 pledged 1 pair mati and taken Rs.5,000/. He deposed that came along with his mother to pledge the ornament.
54. He deposed that on 02.07.2012 the police have brought the accused No.1 and 2 to his shop and seized the paw receipt under mahazar Ex.P3. The Pawn receipt marked as MO14. Signature of the witness is marked as MO14(a). He deposed that he came to know that those persons are involved for committing murder. 32
S.C.No.1416/2012
55. PW28 is the owner of Mataji Jewellers, Nagenahalli Circle. He identified the accused No.1 and 2 through VC and deposed that the accused No.1 came to his shop on 16.06.2012 and pledged one pair ear stud for Rs.9,000/. Then on 02.07.2012 the police have brought the accused No.1 and 2 to his shop and seized MO13 pawn receipt and mahzar Ex.P3. He deposed that since accused pledged the ornaments, police brought them to his shop and he came to know that they committed the murder.
56. PW.29 the Incharge Assistant Director of FSL Madivala deposed that on 11072012 he received 22 sealed items from Kothanur Police and issued an endorsement from his office as per Ex. P51. He compared the seals found on the articles with sample seal and found both are tallying.
Article No.1 is 2 hairs, Article No.2 is 2 hairs, Article No.3 is blood stained cotton, Article No.4 is blood stained soil, Article No.5 is the sample soil 33 S.C.No.1416/2012 Article No.6 is the one stone Article No.7 is the eucalyptus club, Article No.8 is the blood stained soil, Article No.9 is the sample soil Article No.10 is the hairs, Article No.11 is one Shirt, Article No.12 is one Baniyan, Article No.13 is one Lungi, Article No.14 is one Underwear, Article No.15 is one shirt, Article No.16 is one pant, Article No.17 is one shirt, Article No.18 is one Jeans pant, Article No.19 is the hairs, Article No.20 is blood stained cotton, Article No.21 is the hairs, Article 22 is blood stained cotton.
57. He deposed that he subjected the articles for scientific examination and issued a report as per Ex. P52 and the signature of the witness is marked as Ex. P52(a). 34
S.C.No.1416/2012
58. He deposed that article No.3, 6, 7, 8,11,12,13,14,16,17,18,20 and 22 are stained with blood.
Article No. 4,5 and 15 are not stained with blood. Article No.3, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17 and 18 are stained with human blood.
The blood stains in article No.20 and 22 were spoiled. Hence, could not examine.
Article No. 6, 7, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17 and 18 blood stains of group B.
59. He deposed that he could not find out the group of blood stain found in article No. 3 and 8.
He deposed that the hairs in article No.1 and hairs in article No.10 matching each other.
Hairs mentioned in the article No.10, 19 and 21 not matching each other.
Hairs mentioned in article No.1 and hairs in article No. 19 and 21 are not matching each other. He deposed that on examination of the articles he sealed the same and sent to police station. The sample seal of the office marked 35 S.C.No.1416/2012 as Ex.P53 and signature of the witness is marked as Ex.P53(a).
60. With the above evidence now it is for the court whether the prosecution proved beyond all reasonable doubt that the accused No.1 Adimurthy along with co accused and deceased consumed liquor and playing cards andar bahar and all the times the deceased Eshwara used to win the game and on 15.06.2012 he pledged the ornaments of his wife and kept Rs.5,000/ for a gambling and the deceased won the game. Then on 16.06.2012 he pledged the ear stud of his wife and kept Rs.9,000/ for gambling and on 20.06.2012 also the accused Eshwara won the game. Since, the deceased always used to win the game and the accused lost money, he got annoyed against Eshwara and to take revenge against Eshwara that on 20.06.2012 the accused No.1 along with accused No.2 with common intention to commit the murder of Eshwara, they hatched a plan and took Eshwara to the vacant land situated near tank bund at Shivale village and made 36 S.C.No.1416/2012 Eshwara to consume liquor. The accused No.1 assaulted on the face of Eshwara with eucalyptus stick and when Eshwara fallen, the accused No.2 took the size stone (ಸಸಸಜಜ ಕಲಜಲ) and assaulted on the head of Eshwara 2 to 3 times and thereby committed the murder and took away Rs.7,500/ from the possession of the deceased and thereby committed the offence punishable u/s 302 r/w sec. 34 IPC.
61. The learned prosecutor argued that the accused and deceased were working together and they were involved in gambling and deceased always on the winning side. It is argued that the accused persons pledged the golden ornaments and took money and in the gambling they lost the money. So, the accused were get annoyed and hatched a plan to kill the deceased Eshwara. They assaulted on the Eshwara with sticks and stones and caused murder. It is argued that the deceased undertaken work with PW1 and the accused also working with him. So he provided one room near to his house. On 20.06.2012 37 S.C.No.1416/2012 PW1 went to his native place and in the night hours at about 1100 pm when he returned to the house he saw deceased Eshwara in the company of the accused. It is argued that PW1 was last seen the Eshwara with accused. PW17 is the cashier of the bar identified the accused and deposed that they have purchased the liquor on the alleged date of offence and PW21 who is the supplier of the liquor that he saw the deceased in the company of the accused.
62. It is argued that soon after the complaint police have investigated the matter and drawn the mahazar as per Ex.P2 and recovered the stone and sticks from the spot. On 28.06.2012 accused were arrested Pawn receipts seized under mahazar Ex.P3. PW27 and 28 are the pawn brokers who deposed that the accused pledged the ornaments and then they came along with the police on 02072012.
63. It is argued that the blood stained clothes of the deceased and the accused sent to the FSL and FSL report received as per Ex. P52. Further it is argued that seizure 38 S.C.No.1416/2012 mahazar was proved by examining the PW3 to 5. It is argued PW7 and 8 identified the accused and PW9 doctor who conducted the postmortem clearly deposed that injury may be caused through M.O.3 stone. Further argued that the I.O during the course of investigation collected the blood and hair of accused persons under Ex.P.6 and 7.
64. It is argued that the motive of the accused is established by the prosecution. Further seizure is proved by the prosecution. It is also proved that the deceased and accused together went bar and purchased the liquor. Then they went together. It is argued that the circumstances that the deceased was in the company of accused was proved through PW1. PW1 saw the dead body and informed to the police then on receiving the complaint police have investigated the matter and apprehended the accused and based on their voluntary statement recovery was made from the paw broker and they identified the accused which are material evidence placed by the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused. It is argued that the prosecution 39 S.C.No.1416/2012 proved the chain of circumstances. So, the accused is guilty for the offence punishable U/s. 302 r/w sec. 34 of IPC. Accordingly, prays for conviction.
65. The learned advocate argued that the accused not committed any offence and he is innocent. It is argued that IO no where stated that what method he adopted for the seizure of articles. It is argued the story of prosecution that deceased always winning the game and getting money, so the accused are hatched a plan and made a preparation and purchased the liquor and consumed along with the deceased then assaulted on the deceased with stone and club cannot be believed as there was no strong motive to kill Eshwara. It is argued that though the prosecution says pawn receipts are seized, the ornaments not seized by the IO. So, it is fatal to the prosecution case. It is argued that the chain of circumstances not proved by the prosecution and pray for acquittal of the accused.
66. The entire case of the prosecution based on the Circumstantial Evidence. It is settled law that the 40 S.C.No.1416/2012 circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is drawn should be fully proved and such circumstances should be complete and should not be any gap left in the chain of evidence. Further the proved circumstances must be consistent only with hypothesis of guilt of the accused and totally inconsistent with his innocence.
67. In order to establish guilt of the accused five golden principles of a case to be proved when the prosecution relying on the circumstantial evidence [Referred AIR 1984 SC 1622] Sharad Birdhi Chand Sarda vs. State of Maharashtra:
Five golden principles of case to be proved for placing a reliance on the circumstantial evidence
153. A close analysis of this decision would show that the following conditions must be fulfilled before a case against an accused can be said to be fully established:
(1) the circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should be fully established. It may be noted here that this Court indicated that the circumstances concerned 'must or should' and not 'may be' established. There is not only a grammatical but a legal distinction between 'may be proved' and 'must be or should be proved' as was held by this Court in Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade & 41 S.C.No.1416/2012 Anr. v. State of Maharashtra(') where the following observations were made: "Certainly, it is a primary principle that the accused must be and not merely may be guilty before a court can convict and the mental distance between 'may be' and 'must be' is long and divides vague conjectures from sure conclusions."
(2) The facts so established should be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused, that is to say. they should not be explainable on any other hypothesis except that the accused is guilty, (3) the circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and tendency.
(4) they should exclude every possible hypothesis except the one to be proved, and (5) there must be a chain of evidence so complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for the conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and must show that in all human probability the act must have been done by the accused. These five golden principles, if we may say so, constitute the panchsheel of the proof of a case based on circumstantial evidence.
68. It is a burden on the prosecution to establish that the accused were having strong motive to commit the murder of the deceased. It is up to the prosecution to prove that since because the deceased use to win the gambling 42 S.C.No.1416/2012 and the accused were losing money, accused decided to eliminate Eshwara.
69. According to PW1, the accused and deceased were consuming liquor after finishing their work. It does not reflects that the deceased and accused persons having rivalry. Further according to PW1, he has noticed at 1100 p.m. on 20.06.2012 deceased was in the company of the accused persons and they are moving at 1100 p.m., whether there was a light, at that time which cloth they worn, who was riding the motorcycle, where was sitting is not elicited from the mouth of the witness. Because according to the prosecution, accused No.1 and 2 committed the murder of the deceased. If so, when there is no direct evidence it is up to prosecution to elicit and prove that who was riding the motorcycle, where the deceased was sitting and which cloth they worn etc., unless it is elicit it cannot be believed PW1 last seen the deceased in the company of accused person.
43
S.C.No.1416/2012
70. PW2 noticed the dead body, then lodged a complaint. The complaint is not in his handwriting and he do not know the details of mahazar.
71. PW3 though deposed that Police have taken the hairs from the hands of deceased and seized M.O.7 to M.O.12. But in the crossexamination he deposed that he do not know the contents of mahazar and he deposed that he signed the mahazar in the Police Station. The mahazar is written in the handwriting. He also deposed that the Police have not obtained a signature on the M.O.7 to M.O.12.
72. PW4 in his evidence deposed that the Police have seized one Nokia mobile phone, Rs.1,620/ and Pawn receipts from accused Adimurthy.
73. PW5 is evidence deposed against accused No.2.
74. PW6 is the relative of the deceased. He has not supported to the prosecution. The suggestion has been made by the prosecution the accused and deceased were 44 S.C.No.1416/2012 playing the cards and the accused pledged golden ornaments are denied by this witness.
75. PW7 is the wife of the deceased. She do not know anything about the incident. She identified the dead body. She also deposed that the Police have shown the accused and stated these persons committed the murder of her husband. The evidence of this witness nowhere helpful to the prosecution.
76. PW8 also the relative, who visited the hospital and identified the dead body of the deceased.
77. Regarding the recovery is concerned, though PW7 deposed that Police shown the accused persons to him on 01.07.2012, but he deposed that he has not stated before Police that the accused No.2 was a regular customer to the Bar and he deposed he do not know on the alleged date which colour cloths were worn by the accused.
78. PW9 Doctor, deposed about Postmortem conducted on the dead body of deceased Eshwara. In his 45 S.C.No.1416/2012 evidence he deposed about the injury found on the dead body of the deceased and he had given an opinion that the injuries found on the dead body may be caused with blunt weapon, but according to the prosecution the injury caused with club and size stone. There is no material evidence placed by the prosecution to show that the accused persons were having strong builtup body and able to through the stone. According to the prosecution accused No.2 thrown the stone on the deceased. On looking into injuries mentioned in Postmortem report, it is gathered the death of the deceased is Homicidal.
79. PW17 though deposed that on 01.07.2012 the Police came to the Bar along with 2 accused persons and he identified accused, he do not know which cloth was worn by accused persons, when they visited his shop. He further deposed that, he do not know accused persons along with the deceased Eshwara went in a motor cycle and consumed liquor, then caused murder. When many customers visiting bar, it cannot be believed supplier can remember each and every customers.
46
S.C.No.1416/2012
80. PW20 is the Cashier of the Bar and he has not deposed that, the accused persons came to the Bar along with the deceased. So, it cannot be believed that the accused persons on the alleged date purchased the liquor. PW21 also deposed that, on 20.06.2012 the accused and deceased person came to the Bar and purchased the liquor. But in the crossexamination he categorically admitted that by sitting in a cash counter he cannot see the customers, who were visiting the Bar. The evidence of this witness is not helpful to the prosecution to connect the chain that the accused and deceased purchased the liquor from the Bar.
81. PW22 admitted in his crossexamination that, Sri.Naveen Kumar informed that he was having suspicion on the accused. But he has not taken complaint of Sri.Naveen Kumar. He has admitted that though he come to know that deceased was working under Sri.Naveen Kumar. He has not collected any documents. Further it is pertinent to note that the I.O has not collected any 47 S.C.No.1416/2012 documents to show that, the deceased was residing in a shed belonged to Naveen Kumar. Further in this case I.O. has not collected any documents to show that the accused were residing in the opposite house of Sri.Naveen Kumar. Further according to the prosecution I.O., seized the Pawn receipts from the possession of the accused, but he has not seized any ornaments or register extracts connecting to Pawn receipts from the Pawn Broker shop. He has not seized the accounts extract to show that this accused pledged the ornament and taken money. There is no sufficient evidence to show that the accused pledged the ornaments of his wife and took money and used for gambling and the deceased on winning side, so, the accused decided to take a revenge.
82. According to PW27 on 15.06.2012 the accused No.1 came to his jewellery shop, pledged one pair maati for Rs.5,000/, but he deposed that along with accused No.1 his mother also visited the shop to pledge the ornaments. His evidence is contrary to the case of the prosecution. So, 48 S.C.No.1416/2012 it cannot be believed that M.O.14 seized by the Police, which related to accused No.1 alone and accused No.1 pledged the ornaments and used the money for gambling. Further this witness clearly deposed that, if any person comes to their shop to pledge the golden ornaments, he used to collect the identify card of customer, but he has not collected any identity card from the accused in this case. Further this witness not deposed which cloth was worn by the accused No.1, when he visited his shop. The evidence of this witness is not sufficient to connect that accused No.1 pledged the golden ornaments in the shop of PW27.
83. PW24 deposed that he cannot say whether the deceased hairs are human hairs or animal hairs. He also deposed that, he cannot say whose hairs it was and he also deposed that which instrument used to collect the hair from the hands of the deceased. The evidence of this witness not helpful to the prosecution.
84. PW29 speaks about receiving of the articles 1 to
21. Article No.3 is blood stained cotton and article No.8 is 49 S.C.No.1416/2012 the blood stained soil, but this witness depose that by looking strains he cannot determine the group of the blood. Further in his evidence he deposed by looking into the article No.1 i.e., 2 hairs and article No.10 two hairs tallys, but article No.2 i.e., 2 hairs not tallies with article No.10, 19 and 21. In his crossexamination he clearly deposed that in his report he has stated that the hairs collected from the accused and the hairs sent by the Police does not tallies and it is mentioned in the report. He also deposed that he has not mentioned the colour of the hair.
85. In this case the prosecution failed to prove that the accused persons were having enmity with the deceased and accused pledged the golden ornaments for money and played gambling and the deceased was on winning side, hence, the accused planned to eliminate the deceased Eshwara. Further failed to prove the PW1 last seen the deceased in the company of accused. Further failed to prove that the accused purchased a liquor from the Bar and made the deceased to consume the alcohol. The 50 S.C.No.1416/2012 postmortem report does not reflects that there was a alcohol contents in the stomach of the deceased. Another factor for consideration is that, though the prosecution says the Pawn receipts were seized from the possession of the accused, it is not proved through the evidence of the witnesses and also failed to prove the accused pledged the ornament and used the money for gambling.
86. The prosecution failed to establish the strong motive by the accused to commit the murder of the Eshwara. The seized articles are not in closed proximity with the offence. The recoveries made by the I.O during the course of investigation not fully established through evidence. The chain of circumstances is not complete and the allegation against the accused that they have an intention to kill is not fully established. There is no consistency in the evidence of prosecution witnesses regarding recovery. So, I am of the opinion that the prosecution miserably failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence, Point no.1 answered in Negative. 51
S.C.No.1416/2012
87. Point No.2: In view of the above findings, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Acting U/Sec.235(1) of Cr.P.C. the accused No.1 Adimurthy @ Murthy is acquitted for the offence punishable u/S. 302 r/w. 34 IPC.
Accused is set at liberty. Jail authority is hereby directed to release the accused if he is not required in any other case.
(Dictated to the Judgmentwriter, transcribed and computerized by him and after carrying out corrections by me, print out taken by him and then pronounced by me in open Court on this the 17th day of February, 2022.) (Smt.K.G. Shanthi) LVII Addl.City Civil & Sessions Judge, Mayo Hall Unit, Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined for the Prosecution: PW.1 : Naveen Kumar PW.2 : Lakkappa PW.3 : Lakkappa 52 S.C.No.1416/2012 PW.4 : Umesh PW.5 : Anthony PW.6 : Munirathnamma PW.7 : Kasthuravva PW.8 : Basavaraj PW.9 : Dr.B.M.Nagaraju PW.10 : Ramanjeneya PW.11 : Byrappa PW.12 : Ramachandrappa PW.13 : Lakshmana PW.14 : H.R.Channakeshawa PW.15 : Srinivasamurthy PW.16 : Ramappa PW.17 : Jayanna D.K. PW.18 : Shivanna PW.19 : Naveen Kulkarni PW.20 : Amaresh PW.21 : Raghu PW.22 : N.Purushotham PW.23 : Ramappa PW.24 : Chandrashekhar PW.25 : Narasimhalu PW.26 : Manjunatha PW.27 : Prakash PW.28 : Malaram PW.29 : Malathi.D. List of documents marked for the Prosecution:
Ex.P1 : Complaint Ex.P1(a) : Signature Ex.P1(b) : Signature Ex.P2 : Spot Mahazar Ex.P2(a) : Signature Ex.P2(b) : Signature Ex.P2(c) : Signature Ex.P3 : Seizure Mahazar Ex.P3(a) : Signature Ex.P3(b) : Signature 53 S.C.No.1416/2012 Ex.P4 : Written statement of Smt.Munirathnamma Ex.P5 : Postmortem report Ex.P5(a) : PW9's signature Ex.P5(b) : Signature Ex.P6 : Forensic Lab report of Sri.Adimurthy Ex.P6(a) : PW9's signature Ex.P7 : Forensic Lab report of Sri.Anjinappa Ex.P7(a) : PW9's signature Ex.P8 : Forensic Lab report Ex.P8(a) : PW9's signature Ex.P5(b) : Signature Ex.P9 : Sample seal Ex.P.9(a) : PW9's signature Ex.P.10,11 : Mutation Register Extracts Ex.P.12 : RTC Extract Ex.P.13 : Inquest Mahazar Ex.P.13(a) : Signature of Ramanjinappa Ex.P.13(b) : Signature of Byrappa Ex.P.13(c) : Signature Ex.P.13(d) : Signature of PI., Kothanur P.S., Ex.P.14 : Sketch Ex.P.15 : Passport Ex.P.16 : Written statement of Sri.Ramanna Ex.P.17 : Written statement of Sri.Ambarish Ex.P.18 : FIR Ex.P.19 : PF No.29/2012 report Ex.P.19(a) : Signature of PI., Kothanur P.S. Ex.P.20 to 37 : Photos Ex.P.38 : Spot Mahazar Ex.P.38(a) : Signature of PI., Kothanur P.S. Ex.P.38(b) : Signature of Ambarish Ex.P.38(c) : Signature of B.Raja Ex.P.38(d) : Signature of Sri.Naveen Kumar Ex.P.39 : P.F.No.30/2012 report Ex.P.39(a) : Signature of PI., Kothanur P.S. Ex.P.40 : Written statement of Sri.Ramappa Ex.P.41 : P.F.No.34/2012 report Ex.P.41(a) : Signature of PI., Kothanur P.S. 54 S.C.No.1416/2012 Ex.P.42 : P.F.No.36/2012 report Ex.P.42(a) : Signature of PI., Kothanur P.S. Ex.P.43 : Selfstatement of Accused Sri.Anjinappa @ Anji Ex.P.44 : Selfstatement of Accused Sri.Adimurthy @ Adi Ex.P.45 : P.F.No.37/2012 reported Ex.P.45(a) : Signature of PI., Kothanur P.S. Ex.P.46 : Seizure Mahazar Ex.P.46(a) : Signature of PI., Kothanur P.S. Ex.P.46(b) : Signature of Venkatesh Ex.P.46(c) : Signature of Santhosh.S. Ex.P.47 : P.F.No.38/2012 report Ex.P.47(a) : Signature of PI., Kothanur P.S. Ex.P.48 : P.F.No.39/2012 report Ex.P.48(a) : Signature of PI., Kothanur P.S. Ex.P.49 : Seizure Mahazar Ex.P.49(a) : Signature of PI., Kothanur P.S. Ex.P.49(b) : Signature of Babu Ex.P.49(c) : Signature of N.Kumar Ex.P.50 : Photo Ex.P.51 : Acknowledgment Ex.P.52 : Forensic Lab report Ex.P.52(a) : Signature of PW29 Ex.P.53 : Sample seal Ex.P.53(a) : Signature of PW29
List of Mos. marked for prosecution : M.O.1 Motor cycle M.O.2 Wooden club M.O.3 Size stone M.O.4 One pair of chappal M.O.5 One mobile phone M.O.6 Green colour shirt M.O.7, 8 Two boxes (hairs of deceased) M.O.9 Blood stained soil box M.O.10 Sample soil box M.O.11 One fiber and wooden beads (ಹಹರ) 55 S.C.No.1416/2012 M.O.12 One blood stained box M.O.13 Rs.1,620/ and Rs.840/ cash M.O.14 Pawn brokers receipts M.O.15 One Nokia Mobile phone M.O.16 Sample soil M.O.17 Blood stained cotton M.O.18 3 King Fisher liquor bottles M.O.19 Empty King Fisher bottle M.O.20 Empty Jackie Jin liquor bottle M.O.21 One Amruth Silver cup Brandy bottle M.O.22 one empty knockout beer tin M.O.23 2 Empty King Fisher liquor tins M.O.24 One white colour full shirt M.O.25 One white colour baniyan M.O.26 One brown colour underwear M.O.27 One green & black colour Lungi M.O.28 Cash 500 x 2, 100 x 6, 10 x 2 = Rs.1620/ M.O.29 Cash - 500 x 1, 100 x 3, 20 x 2 = Rs.840/ M.O.30 One white colour shirt M.O.31 Blood stained white pant M.O.32 One Tshirt M.O.33 One blue colour jeans pant M.O.34 52 Playing cards (ಇಸಸಸಟಜ ಕಹರರರ) LVII Addl.City Civil & Sessions Judge, Mayo Hall Unit, Bengaluru.
56 S.C.No.1416/2012 Judgment pronounced in open court thourh V.C (vide separate Judgment) ORDER Acting U/Sec.235(1) of Cr.P.C. the accused No.1 Adimurthy @ Murthy is acquitted for the offence punishable u/S. 302 r/w. 34 IPC.
Accused is set at liberty. Jail authority is hereby directed to release the accused if he is not required in any other case.
LVII Addl.City Civil & Sessions Judge, Mayo Hall Unit, Bengaluru.
57 S.C.No.1416/2012