Bangalore District Court
Siddapura Ps vs A1 Rathish on 9 April, 2025
KABC010018162022
IN THE COURT OF THE LXIIII Addl. CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY [CCH.63]
Dated: This the 9th day of April, 2025
: Present :
Sri A. EARANNA, M.Com, LL.M.,
LXII Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru City.
SESSIONS CASE No. 114/2022
Complainant : State of Karnataka,
By Siddapura Police Station,
Bengaluru.
[By : Public Prosecutor]
Vs.
Accused 1. Ratish
S/o Karunanidhi
Aged about 25 years
R/at No. 75, 7th Cross,
Hombegowda Nagar Slum,
Hosura Road, Jayanagar
1st Block, Bengaluru
2. Saratha Kumar Uh Saratha
S/o Mohan
Aged aobut 28 yars
R/at no.150, near Murti mane,
near maramma temple,
hombe gowda nagar slum,
jayanagar, 1st block,
Bangalore
3. Vinod
S/o Selvam
Aged about 29 years
2 SC No.114/2022
R/at No. 219, Near Mariamma Temple,
Hombe Gowda Nagar Slum,
Jayanagar, 1st Block,
Bangalore
4. Vikrama
S/o Selvam
Aged about 25 years
R/at Near Mariamma Temple,
Hombe Gowda Nagar Slum,
Jayanagar, 1st Block,
Bangalore
5. Harish Kumar @ Harish
S/o Sampath,
Aged about 26 years
R/at No. 264, Near Muniyamma House,
4th B Cross, K. S. garden,
Lal Bagh, Siddpur, Jayanagar,
1st Block, Bangalore
6. Sagairaja @ Kariya
S/o J.P. Roberta
Aged about 27 years
R/at No. 2/12, 2nd Cross,
2nd Main, Indira Gandhi Park Road,
Vinayaka Nagar, Bangalore
7. Gopi
S/o Vijaya
Aged about 28 years.
R/at No.19, 1st Main,
1st Cross,Chikkanna Garden,
Shankramatha Hindugade,
Shankarapuram, Bangalore.
(By A1, 2, 3, 6 - Sri. K.R.S. advocate
A4 - Sri. M.K., advocate
A5 - Sri. A.N.P. advocate
A7 - Sri. N.K.S., advocate)
3 SC No.114/2022
Date of commission of offence 10.03.2021
Date of report of offence 10.03.2021
Date of arrest of the Accused Accused No.1, 4 arrested on
30.03.2021
Accused No.2, 3, 5, 6, 7
arrested on 14.03.2021
Date of release of the accused Accused Nos.1 to 3 and 5 to 7
on bail are in JC
Accused No.4 released on
09.09.2024
Name of the complainant Smt. Sumathi
Date of commencement of trial 05.01.2023
Date of closing of 22.11.2024
prosecution evidence
Date of Judgment 09.04.2025
Offences complained of U/s 143, 144, 147, 148, 114,
302 r/w 149 and Section
25(1B) and 27 of Arms Act
Opinion of the Judge Acting under Section 235(2) of
Cr.P.C., the accused Nos.1 to 7
are convicted for the offence
punishable U/s 143, 144, 147,
148, 114, 302 r/w 149 of IPC
and Section 25(1B) and 27 of
Arms Act.
JUDGMENT
The I.O of Siddapura Police submitted a charge sheet against the accused persons of the offences punishable U/s 4 SC No.114/2022 143, 144, 147, 148, 114, 302 r/w 149 of IPC and Section 25(1B) and 27 of Arms Act before the learned II Addl. CMM Court, Bengaluru, who committed the case for disposal in accordance with law.
2. In nutshell, the case of the prosecution is as under;
On 10.03.2021 at about 8.30 pm., Akash son of G.Velu went to public toilet which is situated at the right of muru marada signal. At that time Prathap and his friends Surya were standing nearby public toilet. When Akash went inside the public toilet, all the accused persons having with machu and other articles went inside the public toilet then have assaulted on the Akash and flee away from the place. Then mother of the deceased and other persons came nearby said place, the mother of the deceased saw his son with injuries. Immediately Prathap and other persons and complainant taken Akash in auto to Nimhans hospital where doctor declare that Akash was dead. In this regard the mother of Akash lodged the complaint before respondent police.
5 SC No.114/2022
3. Learned II ACMM, Bengaluru by its order dated 2.7.20221 sent the committal records in CC No. 13448/2021 to the Prl. City Civil and Sessions Court, Bengaluru. Case register in SC No. 114/2022 and committed to this Court. The accused No. 1 to 7 faced the trial through their counsels and thereafter, charge for the offences punishable U/s 143, 144, 147, 148, 114, 302 r/w 149 of IPC and Section 25(1B) and 27 of Arms Act, has been framed against the accused persons, wherein they pleaded not guilty and claim to be tried.
4. In support of its case, the prosecution has examined PWs-1 to PW28 and got marked Ex.P.1 to Ex.P51 and M.O.1 to M.O.19 and closed its side. Thereupon, the accused No. 1 to 7 have been examined U/s 313 of Cr.P.C. by stating the incriminating evidence appearing against them, wherein they have denied the same and they did not choose to lead any evidence on their behalf and thereby, the defence evidence is taken as nil.
5. Heard arguments.
6 SC No.114/2022
6. The points for my consideration are;
1. 1 ರಿಂದ 7 ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿತರು ದಿನಾಂಕ 10.03.2021 ರಂದು ರಾತ್ರಿ ಸುಮಾರು 8.30 ಗಂಟೆಗೆ ಹೊಂಬೇಗೌಡನಗರ ಸ್ಲಂ, ಮೂರು ಮರ ಸಿಗ್ನ ಲ್ ಟಿ. ಮರಿಯಪ್ಪ ರಸ್ತೆ ಮತ್ತು ಹೊಸೂರು ರಸ್ತೆ ಜಂಕ್ಷನ್ನಲ್ಲಿರುವ ಸಾರ್ವಜನಿಕ ಸುಲಭ ಶೌಚಾಲಯಕ್ಕೆ ಚಾಸಾ-1 ರವರ ಮಗನಾದ ಮೃತ ಆಕಾಶ್ ಹೋಗಿದ್ದಾಗ ಮೃತನ ತಂದೆಯಾದ ಚಾಸಾ-6 ರವರ ಮೇಲೆ 1 ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿಯ ಅಣ್ಣ ಮೃತಪಟ್ಟ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ತಪ್ಪು ಕಲ್ಪ ನೆಯ ದ್ವೇಶದಿಂದ, ಆಕಾಶ್ನ್ನು ಕೊಲೆ ಮಾಡುವ ಒಳಸಂಚು ನಡೆಸಿ, ಸಮಾನ ಉದ್ದೇಶದಿಂದ ವ್ಯ ವಸ್ಧಿತ ಅಕ್ರಮ ಕೂಟ ಸೇರಿಕೊಂಡು, ಆ ಮೂಲಕ 1 ರಿಂದ 7 ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿತರು ಭಾರತೀಯ ದಂಡ ಸಂಹಿತೆ ಕಲಂ 120(ಬಿ) ಸಹವಾಚಕ ಕಲಂ 149 ಶಿಕ್ಷಾರ್ಹವಾದ ಅಪರಾಧವನ್ನು ಮಾಡಿರುವರೆಂದು ಅಭಿಯೋಜನೆ ಸಾಬೀತುಪಡಿಸುತ್ತದೆಯೇ?
2. ಎರಡನೇಯದಾಗಿ ಅದೇ ದಿನ, ಸಮಯ ಮತ್ತು ಸ್ಥ ಳದಲ್ಲಿ ಹಳೆಯ ದ್ವೇಷದಿಂದ 1 ರಿಂದ 7 ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿತರು ಮೃತ ಆಕಾಶ್ನನ್ನು ಕೊಲೆ ಮಾಡುವ ಸಮಾನ ದುರುದ್ದೇಶದಿಂದ ವ್ಯ ವಸ್ಧಿತ ಅಕ್ರಮ ಕೂಟ ರಚಿಸಿಕೊಂಡು, ಆ ಮೂಲಕ 1 ರಿಂದ 7 ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿತರು ಭಾರತೀಯ ದಂಡ ಸಂಹಿತೆ ಕಲಂ 143 ಸಹವಾಚಕ ಕಲಂ 149 ಶಿಕ್ಷಾರ್ಹವಾದ ಅಪರಾಧವನ್ನು ಮಾಡಿರುವರೆಂದು ಅಭಿಯೋಜನೆ ಸಾಬೀತುಪಡಿಸುತ್ತದೆಯೇ?
3. ಮೂರನೇಯದಾಗಿ ಅದೇ ದಿನ, ಸಮಯ ಮತ್ತು ಸ್ಥ ಳದಲ್ಲಿ ಹಳೆಯ ದ್ವೇಷದಿಂದ 1 ರಿಂದ 7 ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿತರು ಮೃತ ಆಕಾಶ್ನನ್ನು ಕೊಲೆ ಮಾಡುವ ಸಮಾನ ಉದ್ದೆಶದಿಂದ ಅಕ್ರಮವಾಗಿ ಗುಂಪು ಕಟ್ಟಿಕೊಂಡು ಮಾರಕಾಸ್ತ್ರಗಳಿಂದ ಹಲ್ಲೆ ಮಾಡಿದ್ದು , ಆ ಮೂಲಕ 1 ರಿಂದ 7 ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿತರು ಭಾರತೀಯ ದಂಡ ಸಂಹಿತೆ ಕಲಂ 144 ಸಹವಾಚಕ ಕಲಂ 149 ಶಿಕ್ಷಾರ್ಹವಾದ ಅಪರಾಧವನ್ನು ಮಾಡಿರುವರೆಂದು ಅಭಿಯೋಜನೆ ಸಾಬೀತುಪಡಿಸುತ್ತದೆಯೇ?
7 SC No.114/2022
4. ನಾಲ್ಕ ನೇಯದಾಗಿ ಅದೇ ದಿನ, ಸಮಯ ಮತ್ತು ಸ್ಥ ಳದಲ್ಲಿ ಹಳೆಯ ದ್ವೇಷದಿಂದ 1 ರಿಂದ 7 ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿತರು ಆಕಾಶ್ನನ್ನು ಕೊಲೆ ಮಾಡುವ ಸಮಾನ ಉದ್ದೆಶದಿಂದ ಅಕ್ರಮವಾಗಿ ಗುಂಪು ಕಟ್ಟಿಕೊಂಡು ಮಾರಕಾಸ್ತ್ರಗಳಿಂದ ಹಲ್ಲೆ ಮಾಡಿ ದೊಂಬಿ ನಡೆಸಿದ್ದು , ಆ ಮೂಲಕ 1 ರಿಂದ 7 ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿತರು ಭಾರತೀಯ ದಂಡ ಸಂಹಿತೆ ಕಲಂ 147 ಸಹವಾಚಕ ಕಲಂ 149 ಶಿಕ್ಷಾರ್ಹವಾದ ಅಪರಾಧವನ್ನು ಮಾಡಿರುವರೆಂದು ಅಭಿಯೋಜನೆ ಸಾಬೀತುಪಡಿಸುತ್ತದೆಯೇ?
5. ಐದನೇಯದಾಗಿ ಅದೇ ದಿನ, ಸಮಯ ಮತ್ತು ಸ್ಥ ಳದಲ್ಲಿ ಹಳೆಯ ದ್ವೇಷದಿಂದ 1 ರಿಂದ 7 ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿತರು ಆಕಾಶ್ನನ್ನು ಕೊಲೆ ಮಾಡುವ ನಿಮ್ಮ ಸಮಾನ ಉದ್ದೆಶದಿಂದ ಅಕ್ರಮವಾಗಿ ಗುಂಪು ಕಟ್ಟಿಕೊಂಡು ಮಾರಕಾಸ್ತ್ರಗಳಿಂದ ಹಲ್ಲೆ ಮಾಡಿ ದೊಂಬಿ ಮಾಡಿದ್ದು , ಆ ಮೂಲಕ 1 ರಿಂದ 7 ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿತರು ಭಾರತೀಯ ದಂಡ ಸಂಹಿತೆ ಕಲಂ 148 ಸಹವಾಚಕ ಕಲಂ 149 ಶಿಕ್ಷಾರ್ಹವಾದ ಅಪರಾಧವನ್ನು ಮಾಡಿರುವರೆಂದು ಅಭಿಯೋಜನೆ ಸಾಬೀತುಪಡಿಸುತ್ತದೆಯೇ?
6. ಆರನೇಯದಾಗಿ ಅದೇ ದಿನ 1 ರಿಂದ 7 ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿತರು ಮೇಲೆ ಹೇಳಿದ ಆರೋಪಗಳನ್ನು ಮಾಡಲು ಪ್ರಚೋದನೆ ಮಾಡಿರುತ್ತೀರಿ ಆ ಮೂಲಕ 1 ರಿಂದ 7 ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿತರು ಭಾರತೀಯ ದಂಡ ಸಂಹಿತೆ ಕಲಂ 114 ಸಹವಾಚಕ ಕಲಂ 149 ಶಿಕ್ಷಾರ್ಹವಾದ ಅಪರಾಧವನ್ನು ಮಾಡಿರುವರೆಂದು ಅಭಿಯೋಜನೆ ಸಾಬೀತುಪಡಿಸುತ್ತದೆಯೇ?
7. ಏಳನೇಯದಾಗಿ ಅದೇ ದಿನ, ಸಮಯ ಮತ್ತು ಸ್ಥ ಳದಲ್ಲಿ ಹಳೆಯ ದ್ವೇಷದಿಂದ 1 ರಿಂದ 7 ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿತರು ಆಕಾಶ್ನನ್ನು ಕೊಲೆ ಮಾಡುವ ಸಮಾನ ಉದ್ದೆಶದಿಂದ ಅಕ್ರಮವಾಗಿ ಗುಂಪು ಕಟ್ಟಿಕೊಂಡು 1 ಮತ್ತು 4 ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿಗಳು ಹೇಳಿದಂತೆ 2 ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿಯು ಮೃತ ಆಕಾಶ್ರವರಿಗೆ ತನ್ನ ಬಳಿ ಇದ್ದ ಲಾಂಗ್ ಮಚ್ಚಿನಿಂದ ತಲೆಗೆ ಹೊಡೆದು ತೀವರ್ಸ್ವರೂಪದ ರಕ್ತಗಾಯ 8 SC No.114/2022 ಪಡಿಸಿದಾಗ, 3 ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿಯು 2 ನೇ ಆರೋಪಯ ಬಳಿ ಇದ್ದ ಮಚ್ಚ ನ್ನು ಕಸಿದುಕೊಂಡು ಮೃತನ ತಲೆಗೆ ಹೊಡೆದು ತೀವ್ರ ಸ್ವ ರೂಪದ ರಕ್ತಗಾಯ ಪಡಿಸಿದ್ದು , 3 ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿಯ ಬಳಿ ಇದ್ದ ಮಚ್ಚ ನ್ನು 5 ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿಯು ಕಸಿದುಕೊಂಡು ಮೃತನ ತಲೆಗೆ ಹೊಡೆದು ತೀವ್ರ ಸ್ವ ರೂಪದ ರಕ್ತಗಾಯಪಡಿಸಿದಾಗ 1 ಮತ್ತು 4 ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿಗಳು ಮೃತನು ಇನ್ನೂ ಸತ್ತಿರುವುದಿಲ್ಲ ಇನ್ನೂ ಸರಿಯಾಗಿ ಹೊಡೆಯಿರಿ ಎಂದಾಗ 6 ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿಯು ತನ್ನ ಬಳಿ ಇದ್ದ ಚಾಕುವಿನಿಂದ ಮೃತನ ಎದೆಗೆ ಎರಡು ಮೂರು ಬಾರಿ ಬಲವಾಗಿ ಚುಚ್ಚಿ ತೀವ್ರ ಸ್ವ ರೂಪದ ರಕ್ತಗಾಯ ಪಡಿಸಿದಾಗ, 5 ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿಯು ಸಹ ತನ್ನ ಬಳಿ ಇದ್ದ ಚಾಕುವಿನಿಂದ ಮೃತನ ಬೆನ್ನಿಗೆ ಚುಚ್ಚಿ ತೀವ್ರ ಸ್ವ ರೂಪದ ರಕ್ತಗಾಯ ಪಡಿಸಿದ್ದು , 7 ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿಯು ಮೃತನ ಭುಜಕ್ಕೆ ಚಾಕುವಿನಿಂದ ಚುಚ್ಚಿ ತೀವ್ರತರವಾದ ರಕ್ತಗಾಯವುಂಟು ಮಾಡಿದ್ದು , ಮರಣವನ್ನುಂಟು ಮಾಡಿದರೆ ಕೊಲೆಯ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ತಿಪ್ಪಿತಸ್ಥ ನಾಗುತ್ತೀರೆಂಬ ತಿಳುವಳಿಕೆಯಿದ್ದ ರೂ ಆಕಾಶ್ರವರನ್ನು ಕೊಲೆ ಮಾಡಿದ್ದು ಆ ಮೂಲಕ 1 ರಿಂದ 7 ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿತರು ಭಾರತೀಯ ದಂಡ ಸಂಹಿತೆ ಕಲಂ 302 ಸಹವಾಚಕ ಕಲಂ 149 ಶಿಕ್ಷಾರ್ಹವಾದ ಅಪರಾಧವನ್ನು ಮಾಡಿರುವರೆಂದು ಅಭಿಯೋಜನೆ ಸಾಬೀತುಪಡಿಸುತ್ತದೆಯೇ?
8. ಎಂಟನೇಯದಾಗಿ ಮೇಲೆ ಹೇಳಿದ ದಿನಾಂಕ, ಸಮಯ ಮತ್ತು ಸ್ಥ ಳದಲ್ಲಿ 1 ರಿಂದ 7 ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿತರು ಮಾರಕಾಸ್ತ್ರಗಳಾದ ಮಚ್ಚು , ಚಾಕುವನ್ನು ನಿಮ್ಮ ಹತ್ತಿರ ಇಟ್ಟು ಕೊಂಡು, ಸದರಿ ಮಾರಕಾಸ್ತ್ರಗಳನ್ನು ಕೊಲೆ ಮಾಡಲು ಬಳಸಿದ್ದು ಆ ಮೂಲಕ 1 ರಿಂದ 7 ನೇ ಆರೋಪಿತರು ±À¸ÁÛç¸ÀÛç C¢ü¤AiÀĪÀÄ PÀ®A 25 1 ಬಿ, 27 ರಡಿಯಲ್ಲಿ ಶಿಕ್ಷಾರ್ಹವಾದ ಅಪರಾಧವನ್ನು ಮಾಡಿರುವರೆಂದು ಅಭಿಯೋಜನೆ ಸಾಬೀತುಪಡಿಸುತ್ತದೆಯೇ?
9. What Order?
9 SC No.114/2022
7. My findings on the above points are as under:
Point No.1 : In the Affirmative
Point No.2 : In the Affirmative
Point No.3 : In the Affirmative
Point No.4 : In the Affirmative
Point No.5 : In the Affirmative
Point No.6 : In the Affirmative
Point No.7 : In the Affirmative
Point No.8 : In the Affirmative
Point No.9 : As per final order, for the
following:
REASONS
8. Points No. 1 to 7 : - Since these points are inter connected to each other they are taken together for consideration to avoid repetition of facts and evidence.
9. Inspite of issuance of summons, witness warrant and proclamation proclaimed against CW5, CW19, CW21, CW35, not secured, hence CW5, CW19, CW21, CW35 dropped. CW23 to 29, 31, 38, 39 are given up by the prosecution.
10. Learned Public Prosecutor argued that on 10.03.2021 accused Nos.1 to 7 with intention to commit the offence at about 8.30pm, Akash went to attend nature 10 SC No.114/2022 call at public toilet which was situated at T.Mariyappa road, Muru marad signal. Then the accused persons went behind Akash, then accused persons have assaulted with long and knives, then CW2 who is the paternal uncle of Akash and CW10 were seen the act. Then they went to the said place started hue and cry. Then the accused persons flew away from the said place. CW2 and CW10 in the auto of Naveen taken Akash to the Nimhans hospital, where doctor declared him as brought dead. Then the CW1 lodged the complaint. Based on the complaint Siddhapura police have registered the case in crime No.l57/2021 for the offences punishable U/s 302, 120B, 143, 144, 147, 148 r/w 149 of I.P.C. and 25 1 (b) and 27 of Arms Act. The causes for incident that father of the deceased, G.Velu and brother of the accused No.1 Rajuvelu were known to each other and they were taking alcohol. G.Velu was driving auto. That on 17.01.2021 G.Velu and Rajuvelu were went to Suddhamnagar where Rajuvelu suffered from fits and he was taken to hospital where he was not admitted, then he was advised to take to Bowring hospital. Then he was taken to the said hospital where he died. Then brother of 11 SC No.114/2022 the Rajuvelu i.e., Rithish and others suspected that G.Velu is the causes for death of his brother Rajuvelu. Then for the said enmity, they came infront of house of complainant and stated that G.Velu is causes for death of Rajuvelu and gave threat. Again came and threatened saying where is G.Velu, they have take the life of G.Velu if not any one of the family member of the G.Velu. This is the causes for the said incident. That the CW1 who is the complainant and wife of the G.Velu and mother of the deceased on 10.03.2021 she came to the house at 7.30pm, she went to bring Chicken from the Chicken shop, she returned to the house where her son and daughter were not there. Then one 10 year old boy came and informed to the CW1 that her son was assaulted by someone in public toilet. Then she rushed to the public toilet and her son and daughter were weeping and brother-in-law i.e., CW2 and CW10 were brought the injured Akash. Then Naveen came with his auto to the said place, injured was taken in the said auto to the Nimhans hospital, where doctor declared brought dead. This is the causes for alleged incident. That the motive and intention of the accused persons to take the life 12 SC No.114/2022 of the G.Velu if not anyone of the family of G.Velu. Then they have murdered Akash. She further argued that prosecution examined in all PW1 to PW28. All have supported the prosecution case. Therefore she prays to convict the accused for the alleged offence.
11. Learned Public Prosecutor relied on the judgment in Crl. Appeal No.906/2023 Selvamani Vs The State represented by Inspector of police.
12. Counsel for the accused Nos.1, 2, 3 and 6 argued that the accused persons are not concerned to the said offence. They have falsely implicated in the case. Then someone have assaulted on Akash but the present accused persons are intentionally made as accused in this case. He further argued that infront of the public toilet road was digged, then auto will not come to the said place. As per evidence of witnesses, auto was parked at a distance of 60 feet from the public toilet and CW2 and CW10 were taken the injured Akash and in the said auto taken to hospital. Witnesses have admitted in their evidence that CW2, CW10 and CW1 have got the blood stains of Akash, so also in the said auto but blood stained cloths of CW1, 2 and 10 were 13 SC No.114/2022 not seized by the police and auto not seized by the police and from the public toilet 60 feets injured was taken to the auto, then there must be blood on the road. The said mud was not collected by the investigating officer. CW2, CW10 and another witness seems to be alleged eye witnesses to the incident. They have not supported the prosecution case. So also seizer mahazar witness and mahazar witness have not supported the prosecution case. CW2 alleged to be eye witness, he has deposed in his cross examination, he came from his office at 8.30pm then he went to the said place where there was no any person but Akash was laying with pool of blood in the public toilet. He further deposed he was not seen the incident nor accused persons. CW2 who is the alleged to be eye witness to the incident has not at all supported the prosecution case. PW1 admitted in her evidence that she is not eye witness to the incident and she do not know the contents of Ex.P1. Apart from it inquest witness were also not supported the prosecution case. Witnesses are deposed that there is shelter gate to the said bathroom, then no one can see what happening in the said 14 SC No.114/2022 bathroom. Therefore is no evidence against the accused persons. Therefore he prays to acquit the accused persons.
13. Counsel for the accused Nos.5, 4 and 7 have stated that they are adopting the arguments of above said accused persons. Therefore they prays to acquit the accused persons as there is no reasons. They have relied the following judgments;
1. 2023 (1) AKR 785 - Basavaraj Mahadevappa Ramaji Vs State of Karnataka
2. 2023 (1) AKR 405 - Somesha H.M. @ Putta Vs. State of Karnataka
3. 2024 (1) AKR 95 - Balaji @ Setu Amar Raj VS State of Karnataka
4. 2024 (1) AKR 625 - Babu @ Sayed Babu Vs. State of Karnataka
5. AIR 2023 SC 1599 - Nand Lal Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
6. AIR 2023 SC 1199 - Roopwanti Vs. State of Haryana
7. AIR 2024 SC 498 - Jitendra Kumar Mishra @ Jittu Vs State of Madhya Pradesh
8. AIR 2024 SC 2769 - Jagvir Singh Vs State of U.P.
9. AIR 2023 SC 1639 - Pulen Phukan VS. State of Assam
10. AIR 2023 SC 5054 - Irshad Vs State of Haryana
11. AIR 2024 SC 1667 - Periyasamy Vs. State rep by Inspector of Police 15 SC No.114/2022
12. AIR 2024 SC 3077 - Jasobanta Sahu Vs State of Orissa
13. AIR 2024 SC 4846 - Vijay Singh @ Vijay KR Sharma VS State of Bihar
14. Prosecution has produced the evidence of PW1 i.e., Smt.Sumathi who is the mother of deceased Akash. As per the evidence of PW1 she has got one daughter and two sons. They are residing since 23 years in Siddhapura alongwith her children and husband. On 10.03.2021 she went at 7.45pm to bring Chicken at Siddhapura. At that time her daughter and two sons were in the house. After 10 minutes she brought Chicken to the house, when she came to house none of her children were in the house. Then one boy came and informed that in the public toilet which is situated at Muru marad signal, someone have assaulted Akash. After getting the information she rushed to the public toilet where her daughter Abita and her son Aditya were weeping outside. Then her brother-in-law Prathap was taken her son from the public toilet and he was sustained injuries on head and stab injuries on stomach. Due to it he was sustained bleeding injuries. She further deposed her son was taken by herself and CW2 and CW10 to Nimhans 16 SC No.114/2022 hospital. After examining the Akash, doctor declared him as brought dead. She further deposed accused No.1 Rithish brother was died in the month of January. Accused No.1 Rithish has misunderstood that Rajuvelu was died to fault of G.Velu, for that they were making enmity against G.Velu and his family members. Then Rithish came and told one of the family member will be eliminated. For that they have given threaten. Then for that reason Akash was murdered by the accused persons. After death of her son went to the station and lodged the complaint as per Ex.P1. She further deposed after lodging the complaint, Siddhapura police came to the same public toilet where they have verified the said place, in the said place there was blood and police have collected the said blood through cotton and four chappals and taken photos. She further deposed out of four chappals, one pair chappal belong to her son Akash. Said mahazar was marked as Ex.P2. She identified her signature in the Ex.P2. She further deposed said Chappals were sealed in white cloth. She identified one pair of Chappal belongs to her son Akash and another two chappals, out of which one belongs to Sharath and another 17 SC No.114/2022 Chappal belongs to other person. She further deposed after two days of the incident she was called to the station where she identified the accused Vinod, Sharath, Harish, Sagai and Gopi. Again after two days she was called to the station where she has seen the accused Ritish and Vikram. She deposed those persons are causes for death of her son Akash. She further identified the cloths of Akash i.e., one Shirt, Jeans Pant and underwear. Said mahazar marked as Ex.P3 and Ex.P4.
15. She was cross examined by the counsel for the accused No.4. In the cross examination she deposed they are residing in the said place since 23 years and she was working as house maid at Wilson garden. She deposed she do not know how much distance from the house of the said place. She further deposed she left the house at 7.30am and return at 5.00pm. As per evidence of PW1 her husband was running the auto. He went at 5.00am from the house. If there was not passengers then he will return at 2-3 hours. Apart from it her husband was not doing any work. She deposed her husband was taking liquor, after taking liquor her husband was not making galata. She further 18 SC No.114/2022 deposed Rajuvelu and her husband were friends. After quarrel they were separated some days. As per her evidence at 7.30pm she went to Siddhapura to bring Chicken from the Chicken shop. Said Chicken shop is situated at ½ kms distance from her house. After 10 minutes she returned to the house, where 10 years old boy came and informed that her son was assaulted in public toilet. She further deposed when she will be in her house, she will not get visible to the public toilet. She further deposed said public toilet is situated after 6-7 houses from her house. She further deposed she is not eye witness to the incident. She further deposed on the same day at 11.00pm when to the station and lodged the complaint. She further deposed as per the say in the station PC has written the Ex.P1. She further deposed she do not know the name of the said PC. Thereafter she signed on the said document.
16. Counsel for the accused Nos.1 to 3 and 6 cross examined this witness she deposed she do not know read and write the Kannada Language. She was working nearby the Wilson Garden. She deposed she do not know distance 19 SC No.114/2022 from her house from Wilson Garden police station. So also from her house to Nimhans hospital. She deposed said public toilet is having only one gate to ingress and egress. As per evidence of PW1 infront of the public toilet there is road having two ways and there is a divider in the middle. Infront of the public toilet road was dig. In another side road was not dig where buses were moving here and there. She further deposed the boy who gave information his name and address are not known. She further deposed in the bathroom there is blood. Apart from it from the said bathroom where Akash was taken in auto, in between these place blood was fell on the road. She further deposed she do not know the said auto number. CW2 has got the blood stains, so also she got blood stains on her saree. As per the evidence of PW1 that the blood stain shirts of PW2 and blood stained saree were not at all collected by the police.
17. She was cross examined by the counsel for the accused No.7. She has not given the name of the accused No.7. She deposed she do not know the name of the 20 SC No.114/2022 accused No.7 at that point of time. She denied accused No.7 is no way concerned to the said case.
18. On perusal of the entire evidence of PW1, she is not eye witness to the incident. On 10.03.2021 she came to her house. At 7.40pm she went to bring Chicken, then after 10 minutes she came to the house. Then her children were not in the house. One boy aged about 10 years came and informed that her son was assaulted in the public bathroom. Then she rushed to the said place where her daughter and another son weeping outside. Then CW2 and CW10 were brought Akash from the bathroom and he was taken in the auto of PW12. Then she lodged the complaint. As per evidence of PW1 that she identified the accused persons and she has narrated cause of incident in her evidence. Admittedly PW1 is not know read and write Kannada language and she lodged the complaint in the station. From the evidence PW1 prosecution has established that previous enmity between the accused person sand against her husband. Then accused persons intended to take revenge for death of Rajuvelu. Even though husband of PW1 is not causes for death of 21 SC No.114/2022 Rajuvelu. On the other hand brother of Rajuvelu, Rithesh and his brother have misunderstood that G.Velu is causes for death of their brother. From the evidence of PW1 established that motive for the commission of offence. As already stated above accused persons bought to the weapons i.e., longs and two knives at Sunday Bazar at Bengaluru. As per prosecution case, after assault made by the accused persons that they have took the above said material objects and went away from the said place. After incident that the accused persons have left their slippers in hurry manner and went away from the said place. PW1 deposed she has lodged the complaint. Admittedly it was typed complaint. She deposed she do not know read and write Kannada Language. Then, as per her say typed the complaint. She has not denied signature on the Ex.P1 as well as contents of Ex.P1. On going through the evidence of PW1 that after receiving the intimation she rushed to the place where her brother-in-law i.e., PW2 Prathap was there in the said place, on enquiry he has narrated the incident. From the evidence of PW1 it is clear that when she reached the said place PW2 already present and he and CW10 were 22 SC No.114/2022 taken the injured Akash from public toilet into auto of PW12. As per evidence of PW1 she has not see the assault made by the accused persons. However immediately she went to the said place and injured was taken to Nimhans hospital. On the other hand counsel for the accused persons have taken contention that someone have assaulted and injured was taken in ambulance. Defence of the accused itself is clear that Akash was sustained injuries by assault made with objects like long and knives. The suggestion itself is clear that Akash was died due to assault but not for other reason and witnesses have denied injured was taken in Ambulance. Therefore from the defence of the accused itself is clear that Akash was not taken in the Ambulance and he was taken in auto of PW12. Therefore from the evidence of PW1 it is clear that causes of incident and identification of the accused person. She deposed in her presence conducted the mahazar as per Ex.P2. She deposed police have collected the blood from the bathroom through cotton and also collected four pair of chappal and she identified one pair of chappal belongs to Akash. Apart from it she has identified the cloths of 23 SC No.114/2022 deceased Akash. She is only person to identify the cloths of Akash. Therefore from the evidence of PW1 prosecution has established that she lodged the complaint as per Ex.P1, in her presence conducted the Ex.P2 and seized the above said articles.
19. PW2 Prathap, he deposed CW1 Sumathi is his sister-in-law and G.Velu is his cousin brother. CW1 resided in Siddhapura slum along with her husband and three children. On 10.03.2021 he returned from his office at 7.30pm. While he was taking tea in bakery along with his friend which was situated nearby Murumara which is situated nearby the public toilet. While taking tea in bakery Akash went to public toilet. Behind Akash, accused Rithesh, Vinod, Sharath, Harish, Sagai, Gopi, they all went behind Akash. Then 3-4 persons who were in the public toilet they came running from the toilet. He deposed he came nearby the public toilet shelter was closed where above said accused persons assaulting on Akash with knives and weapon and he further deposed he was standing nearby the gate and he has seen the incident which was taken inside the public toilet. He further 24 SC No.114/2022 deposed he try to open the gate but they were locked from inside. He try to open the gate accused persons have try to assault him, then he made hue and cry, accused persons were went away from the said place. Immediately he called his friend. Then CW1 came to the said place, he deposed he, CW1 were taken Akash in the auto to the Nimhans hospital. After examining the Akash, doctor declared brought dead.
20. As per the evidence of PW2, he deposed on 17.01.2021 brother of Rithesh, Rajuvelu was died, for the death of Rajuvelu, they have misunderstood that G.Velu is the reason. For that enmity that they have told they will take life of G.Velu or one of the family members of the Velu. Then Rithesh, Sagairaju threatening the G.Velu and his family. He further deposed on 15.03.2021 police called him to the station where he has identified in all five accused persons namely Vinod, Sagairaju, Harishkumar, Gopi and Sharathkumar. He further deposed after lapse of 15 days he was again called to the station and went to the station where he has identified the Rithesh and Vikram. He further deposed those persons were killed Akash. He identified in 25 SC No.114/2022 all accused Nos.1 to 7 who were produced from JC through VC. He further deposed he has seen the weapons which were used for commission of offence. He identified one iron long, same is marked as M.O.8, one button knife same is marked as M.O.9, one more button knife marked as M.O.10. He further deposed from long, they have assaulted on Akash and from the button knives they have stabbed on Akash. PW2 is material witness who is eye witness, where he has seen the Akash went to public toilet, behind him the accused persons were went to the public toilet. Immediately 3-4 person who were in the public toilet came outside. Then they have assaulted on the Akash. As per evidence of PW2 he try to open the gate but they have locked inside. They have also threatened him, after making hue and cry they went away from the said place along with weapons which were used for the commission of the offence. He was cross examined by the counsel for the accused No.4. He deposed he was working at Rajajinagar. From the said place his house is situated at 12 kms and he was working since 3 years in the said place. As per evidence of PW2 he left the house and attending his work 26 SC No.114/2022 at 10.30am to 7.30pm. After completion of work he may left the work at 7.30pm and he may reach house at 8.20pm and Sunday is holiday. After completion of work he came nearby the said bakery, after having the tea and spent half an hour in the bakery and thereafter he went to his house. As per evidence of PW2, on that day he and his friend were taking tea in the bakery, then he has seen the incident. However he deposed in the cross examination on that day he has not seen Vikram. He further deposed he cannot say Vikram was there in the said act or not. He further deposed he cannot remember he has given statement against Vikram or not. He denied he was deposing falsely.
21. On perusal of the evidence of PW2 he has stated houses of Rithesh, Vinod, Sagai Raj and Sharath are situated in our area. He further denied he was not taken Akash from public toilet to hospital and he was taken in ambulance. He deposed as per the say of his mother he has deposed before the court in the last date. On going through evidence of this witness in the cross-examination he has stated in different manner that of prosecution case. However if he has not present in the said place and he has 27 SC No.114/2022 not seen the incident then he may deposed examination in chief stating that he has not seen that Akash went to the public toilet and accused persons were not went behind Akash and he has not seen the accused persons were assaulted on Akash, due to it Akash was sustained injuries on head, chest, stomach and back portion and he has stated he has made hue and cry, then the accused persons went away from the said place. Immediately he gave phone call to PW8 and PW8 came and Akash was taken in the auto of PW12. That itself shows that for some reasons he is deposing in different manner in cross-examination. However on perusal of the entire evidence of PW2 it is clear that he was present on that place, on that day, at that time.
22. PW3 Syed Mubarak is also another witness. As per his evidence he is having his garage by name A.M.motors nearby Murumara. Before that his garage name was mentioned as HTM motors. He further deposed Sidhapura police have enquired about the case. He further deposed on 10.03.2021 at about 8.30pm while he went to attend nature call in the public toilet which is situated nearby 28 SC No.114/2022 Murumara. Then 5-6 boys were assaulted on one boy in the toilet. Said boys were assaulted with machu and said bathroom is having rolling gate and they have locked inside. He deposed due to fear he was not saved the boy from assault. He further deposed boy who sustained injuries is died. He deposed he do not know the names of the said boys. He deposed he has given statement before the police. He deposed out of 1-7 accused persons he has identified the accused No.2. But he has not identified the accused Nos.1, 3 to 7. Then the prosecution cross examined this witness. Inspite of it he has not identified accused Nos.1, 3 to 7. On the other hand he deposed he came to know that due to assault made by those boys Akash was died. He was cross-examined by the Counsel for the Accused Nos.1, 2 and 6, he deposed he has not opened garage for one week as he came to know galata was taken in the said place. He further deposed on the next date of incident he went to the police station but he has not given the statement. He deposed as road was digged then person may not see what would happen in the said public toilet. He deposed he do not know about the galata. Admittedly 29 SC No.114/2022 PW3 is not eye witness to the incident. On the other hand his garage was situated nearby murumara then he came to know the alleged incident. Further, on perusal of the cross of this witness he deposed "ಆ ದಿನ ಗಲಾಟೆಯಾಗಿರುವುದನ್ನು ನಾನು ನೋಡಿರುವುದಿಲ್ಲ ಎಂದರೆ ಸರಿಯಲ್ಲ ". He further deposed "ನಾನು ಶೌಚಾಲಕ್ಕೆ ಹೋಗಿರುತ್ತೇನೆ, ಗಲಾಟೆಯಾಗಿರುತ್ತದೆ ಎಂದು ಸುಳ್ಳು ಹೇಳುತ್ತಿದ್ದೇನೆ ಎಂದರೆ ಸರಿಯಲ್ಲ ". The evidence of PW3 reveals that he has having his garage nearby the said place and he has seen the galata which was taken in the said public toilet. Even though the suggestions put forth by the Counsel for the accused, he denied as stated above. Therefore from the evidence of PW3 prosecution established its case.
23. PW4 Kumari. Abita, she deposed CW1 and CW6 are her mother and father. Aditya and Akash are her younger brothers. On 10.03.2021 herself, her mother and grand mother and her younger brothers were in the house. Her mother went at 8.00pm to bring Chicken from Chicken shop. Then her brother Akash went to attend the nature call as their house is not having toilet room. Immediately after few minutes one boy came and informed someone have assaulted on the Akash in the public toilet. After 30 SC No.114/2022 getting the information herself and her brother went to public toilet where her younger brother was laying in the public toilet and he was sustained injuries on head, chest and back and he was unconscious. CW2 already presented in the said place. On enquiry with the CW2, CW2 gave information that Rithesh, Sharath, Vinod, Vikram and another three persons were assaulted on Akash with knife and machu. CW2 and CW10 Chandrashekar have taken injured Akash in a auto to Nimhans hospital. Then doctor declared him as brought dead. She further deposed herself, CW1 and her relatives went to the hospital. Thereafter, herself, CW8 and CW1 went to the Siddhapura police station and lodged the complaint. She further deposed brother of Rithesh i.e., Rajuvelu died on 17.01.2021 due to fits. But brother of Rajuvelu misunderstood that her father is causes for death of Rajuvelu. Then they threatened that they will take life of G.Velu, if not any one of the family member. She identified the accused Nos.1 to 7.
24. Counsel for the accused No.4 has not cross examined this witness.
31 SC No.114/2022
25. Counsel for the accused Nos.1, 2, 3 and 6 have cross examined this witness. She deposed her father is aged about 45 years. Rajuvelu was not younger to her father. She denied at no point of time Rajuvelu was friend of her father. Rajuvelu was died due to fits. After death of Rajuvelu, Rajuvelu's brother had lodged the complaint against her father. She denied accused persons were not came infront of their house and they were not making threaten to them. She further deposed on 17.01.2021 accused persons were came and made galata and gave threat to them. On 17.01.2021 they have lodged the complaint against accused persons regarding threat given by them. She deposed she do not know the crime number. She further deposed where road runs infront of public toilet, road was dig. However she denied due to it vehicles were not moving here and there. She further deposed due to it they have made vehicles moving in some other road. From 500mts of public toilet, road was digged. Said public toilet is having only one door. She denied if the person was standing outside, she may not see what happening in the public toilet. She deposed there are windows to the said 32 SC No.114/2022 public toilet. She deposed she went to the said place within two minutes from their house. She deposed PW2 and PW8 and her mother were taken the injured to the Nimhans hospital. CW1 were having blood stains and also auto got blood stains. She denied accused persons are not causes for death of her brother. She deposed she do not know the name of boy who came and informed that the accused persons are assaulting on Akash. On careful perusal of the evidence of PW4, she is not eye witness to the incident. She and CW8 were in the house. Akash went to attend the nature call at public toilet. Within few minutes one boy came and informed that someone assaulted on Akash in the public toilet. Then herself and CW8 were rushed to the said place, where PW2 was present. After enquiry PW2 has informed about the incident. Therefore the presence of PW2 in the said place is proved by the prosecution. Even though PW1 and PW4 also deposed, when they went to the said place PW2 was already present.
26. PW5 Aditya, he deposed CW1 and CW6 are his mother and father. CW7 is his sister and Akash is his elder brother. Accused No.1 who is the brother of the Rajuvelu, 33 SC No.114/2022 on 17.01.2021 Rajuvelu died due to fits. Rithesh has misunderstood that his father had killed Rajuvelu. Then, Rithesh, Sharath, Vikram, Vinod and other three persons were all threatened that in your house they will take the life of one person. On 10.03.2021 himself, his mother and grand mother and his sister and deceased Akash were in the house. His mother went at 8.00pm to bring Chicken from Chicken shop. Then his brother Akash went to attend the nature call as their house is not having toilet room. Immediately after five minutes one boy came and informed someone have assaulted on the Akash in the public toilet. After getting the information himself and CW7 went to public toilet where his brother was laying in the public toilet and he was sustained injuries on head, chest and back and he was unconscious. CW2 already present in the said place. At that time CW1 came to the said place. He further deposed CW1, CW2 and CW10 have taken injured Akash in a auto to Nimhans hospital. Then doctor declared him as brought dead. Then he himself and CW7 and his relatives went to the hospital. He and CW7 and CW1 went to Siddhapura police station. CW1 lodged the complaint 34 SC No.114/2022 before the police. On enquiry with the CW2, CW2 gave information that Rithesh, Sharath, Vinod, Vikram and another three persons were assaulted on Akash with machu and stabbed with knife. He has identified the accused persons.
27. Counsel for the accused No.4 has not cross examined this witness.
28. Counsel for the accused Nos.1, 2, 3 and 6 cross examined this witness. He deposed house of the Rithesh was in Vinayaka nagar. Rajuvelu was aged about 24 years and his father was aged about 43 years. He deposed his father and Rajuvelu were friends. After death of Rajuvelu he was not went to the funeral ceremony of Rajuvelu. Then accused persons came to their house and made galata stating that your father is causes for death of Rajuvelu. After accused gave threat they went to lodge the complaint before police and denied they have not lodged the complaint. He further deposed infront of the public toilet road was under tapping and vehicles are not moving on the said road. In some other place made arrangements to move the vehicles. He further deposed the boy who informed 35 SC No.114/2022 about the incident his name is not known. But said boy was residing nearby their house. He denied that there was no widows to the said public toilet. The auto was nearby the said bakery. CW2 and CW10 taken the Akash to the said auto and he was taken to hospital. He deposed he do not know the registration number of the auto. He further deposed he has not seen the long and knives in the said place. He denied he was not went to the said place. He denied after dead body was brought to the house then as per the say of the police, he is deposing falsely against the accused persons. He deposed at 9.00pm public toilets are closed. He further deposed they were bathing in their house but there is no facility for attending nature call in the house, then they use public toilet. He also deposed PW2 was also present in the said place.
29. PW6 Velu who is the husband of CW1, father of CW7 and CW8 and deceased Akash. He deposed he know the accused Rithesh, Sharath, Vinod and Vikram, they are residing in the same area and he know the said persons. He further deposed Harish, Sagairaju and Gopi are the 36 SC No.114/2022 friends of accused Nos.1 to 4. He further deposed he has seen the said persons when they came to their area.
30. On 10.03.2021 at about 8.30pm, his wife gave intimation, accused persons have assaulted with machu and long on their son Akash. He was in Arasikere in his sister's house and he came to Nimhans hospital at morning hours and seen the dead body of his son. As per his evidence his son was sustained injuries on head, left portion of the chest and his son was died and his wife has informed that the above said accused persons have assaulted their son.
31. Brother of the Rithesh i.e., Rajuvelu was known to him. On 17.01.2021 at 4.00pm., while he was proceeding from Lalbagh, then Rajuvelu came and met him. He and Rajuvelu went to Sudham nagar. After taking alcohol, played choukabar. Said Rajuvel fell down on the Sudham nagar drainage bridge due to fits. He was given iron and he was taken to nearest hospital. Therefrom he was taken to Bowring hospital. On the same day he died. Then the Accused No.1 Rithesh came to Bowring hospital and suspected on him regarding death of his brother Rajuvelu. 37 SC No.114/2022 Then, the Accused persons by name Sagai, Sharath, Rithesh and Vinod threatened PW6 to commit his murder. Due to fear he went to Hosa road where his relatives are there. From the said place he went to Viruddhachalam of Tamilnadu where his sister is residing. After 10 days Wilsongarden police called him to the police station, they enquired how Rajuvelu fell down. He deposed he has given the information. Then police told you do not stay here, if you stays there then there is chances of galata. From the said place he went to Arasikere where his sister is residing. That on 10.03.2021 he received phone call from his wife, at about 8.30pm the above said Accused persons have killed Akash. He identified Accused Nos.1 to 7. He was cross examined by the Counsel for the accused Nos.1, 2, 3 and 6. He deposed he was running the auto bearing No.7579. Rajuvelu was taken to the hospital in the different auto to the Bowring hospital. He further deposed his auto was seized by the Finance company. After death of Rajuvelu no complaint was lodged against him. He further denied accused by name Sagai, Sharath, Rithesh and Vinod were hatched plan to eliminate him. He denied he do not know 38 SC No.114/2022 Rajuvelu and he deposed he do not know Rajuvelu's house number.
32. Counsel for the accused No.4 has not cross examined this witness. Counsel for the Accused Nos.5 and 7 cross examined this witness. In the cross examination he deposed in their house there is facility to take bath in the house but not attend the nature call. He deposed if they wanted to attend the nature call, then they has to go to the public toilet which is situated nearby muru marada signal. He denied he do not know the accused persons. He deposed there is no enmity in between him and accused Gopi. Gopi was not resided in the said area. He denied accused persons have not gave threat to them. He denied as per the say of police he came to know the Accused persons name. He denied someone has killed Akash, for that purpose accused Gopi was made to sit in police station. He denied accused persons have not committed the alleged offence. He denied on the say of police he is deposing before the court. PW6 is not eye witness to the incident. However he has narrated how Rajuvelu was died, for that accused persons hatched plan to kill him, for that 39 SC No.114/2022 he left the house and resided at his sister's house at Virudhachalam, Tamilnadu as well as Arasikere. After getting the information from his wife he came to know his son Akash was killed by the Accused persons. Even though in the cross examination there is no evidence brought by the Accused that there is no enmity between themselves and PW6. From the evidence of PW6 it is clear that motive of the accused persons, that the accused persons intend to eliminate him nor his family members. He identified dead body of his son.
33. PW7 Asha who is the inquest mahazar witness, she deposed CW6 is her brother-in-law. CW1 is wife of CW6. CW1 and CW6 have got three children i.e., CW7 and CW8 and deceased Akash. CW1 and CW6 were residing at Hombegowda slum. Son of CW6 was died. On 10.03.2021 at about 8.30pm, he was murdered in the public toilet of Hombegowda nagar. After getting the information, she went to the said public toilet where Akash was laying on the ground in the public toilet. He was sustained injuries on chest, stomach and back and he was taken to Nimhans hospital. After getting the information she went to Nimhans 40 SC No.114/2022 hospital where she has seen the dead body of Akash. Due to enmity between the CW6 and accused persons, accused persons were killed the deceased Akash. As per her evidence accused persons have threatened the CW1, CW7 and CW8. She identified the accused Sharath, Rithes, Vinod and Vikram. She was cross-examined by the Counsel for the accused Nos.1, 2, 3 and 6. Police have not enquired her when she was working at Wilsongarden. She left the house at 8.30am and she will return to the home at 7/8/8.30pm. On the date of incident she was having extra work and she returned to home at 8.30pm. Her house is situated at 2.00kms from Wilson garden. At that time road was digged and vehicles are not moving here and there due to road was digged. On the other hand she deposed on the other side of the road vehicles were moving here and there. She denied accused persons were not made galata and they were residing nearby their house. She denied she was not went to the above said public toilet. She denied after dead body brought to the house she came to know. She denied after CW1 informed, she came to know the above said fact. She denied as per the say of police deposing falsely. 41 SC No.114/2022 Admittedly she is not eye witness to the incident. After getting the information that Akash was killed then she rushed to the said place. Her evidence is important that the Accused persons went to the house of CW1 and threatened the family members of CW1. Inspite of lengthy cross examination they have not brought that she has not known the said facts nor accused persons have gave life threat to the CW1 and her family members. There is no necessity to depose before the court falsely on the say of CW6 and police. There is no reason to disbelieve and discard the evidence of PW7.
34. PW8 Chandrashekar who is the material witness in this case, as per his evidence he know the CW1, CW2, CW6, CW7 and CW8 and deceased Akash and they are residing at Hombegowda nagar slum. He deposed on 10.03.2021 at about 8.30pm while he was in the house, CW2 gave phone call and asked to come immediately to public toilet of Hombegowda nagar. Then he went to the said place where Akash was laying on the ground of public toilet and he was sustained injuries on head, hand and leg and blood was on the ground. CW2 and himself took Akash 42 SC No.114/2022 in an auto and he was taken to Nimhans hospital. After sometime he got intimation that Akash was died. On enquiry CW2 told that Vinod, Sharath, Rithesh and Vikram all of them assaulted with macchu, due to it he suffered injuries. He further deposed brother of accused Rithesh by name Rajuvelu was died, for that the Accused persons have got enmity against above said persons. He has identified the accused persons and also photo of deceased Akash. PW8 is the independent witness, after getting the phone call from CW2, he rushed to the public toilet, he and CW2 took Akash from public toilet and he was put him in the auto of CW11 Naveen. As per evidence of PW2, he is also deposed after the incident he gave phone call, then PW8 came, he and PW8 were shifted Akash from public toilet into the auto of CW11 Naveen. PW8 is not relative of PW1, PW2 or PW6 and he has not having any enmity against the Accused person nor he intentionally deposing against the accused persons. He was cross examined by the Counsel for the Accused Nos.1, 2, 3 and 6. He deposed he has given statement before police on the next day. He deposed CW2 gave phone call and he went to the said place. Police have 43 SC No.114/2022 not gave notice to come and give the statement. He denied he has not given the statement before the police. He deposed he and CW2 were held the Akash and they were seated backside of the auto, due to it he and CW2 sustained blood stains and police have not taken their blood stained cloths. He deposed if a person standing about 100feet from the said toilet he cannot see what is happening in the said toilet. He further deposed said toilet is situated about 10feet from main road. He further deposed CW1 has not lifted the Akash into the auto. At the same time PW1 deposed she has not lifted Akash into the auto, she deposed CW2 and another person have lifted Akash from the said public toilet into the auto. He denied he was not present in the said place. PW8 is the material witness and he is the circumstantial witness, after getting information from CW2, he came to the said place. Therefore from the evidence of PW8 prosecution has proved PW2 present in the said place.
35. PW9 Balaji, he deposed police have obtained his signature on Ex.P2. He further deposed on 10.03.2021 at about 11-11.30pm he and Siddhapura police PI, PSI, CW1 44 SC No.114/2022 and CW12 went to the 7 th Cross of Siddhapura where public toilet is situated, where Akash killed in the said place. Police have collected the blood sample and three pairs of chappals and police have conducted the mahazar as per Ex.P6. However he has not identified the dresses of Akash. To this effect prosecution has cross examined. Counsel for the Accused No.4 has not cross examined this witness.
36. However he was cross examined Counsel for the accused Nos.1, 2, 3 and 6, he deposed CW2 is his younger brother. CW1 is his distant relative. House of the CW1 is situated little distance from his house. He deposed at about 10.00pm police gave notice and conducted the mahazar at 11.30pm. He deposed 2nd time police gave notice at about 9.30 to 10.00am and he went to the station. He denied as per the say of the police, he has signed on the documents. He denied he was not went to the said place. He denied CW1 and CW2 are the distant relative, to help them he is deposing before the court. PW9 who is the spot mahazar witness, in his presence conducted the mahazar at that time PW1 is also present. Therefore from the evidence of 45 SC No.114/2022 PW1 and PW9 prosecution has proved that in the said place conducted the mahazar and seized three pairs of chappal and blood sample from the said place. Therefore from the evidence of PW9 prosecution has proved the place of incident.
37. PW10 Surya who is the material witness, he deposed he know the CW1, CW2 and CW6 and deceased Akash. He deposed he do not know the Accused persons. He further deposed he has seen the Accused persons in the said area.
38. He deposed on 10.03.2021 at about 8.15pm he was nearby the bakery which is situated at Hombegowda slum, he and CW2 were having tea, then Akash went to public toilet. After sometime heard the screaming, he and CW2 went inside the public toilet, wherein persons were quarreling with Akash. Then CW2 told to go and bring the CW1. Then he went to the said house, none were present in the said house. Then he came to the shop, there also none were present. Then he again went to the public toilet where number of persons were gathered. CW2 and CW10 were shifting Akash from public toilet into the auto. He further 46 SC No.114/2022 deposed Akash was sustained injuries on head, bleeding was present on head. He deposed Sidhapura police have recorded his statement. Prosecution cross examined this witness. In the cross examination he admitted on 10.03.2021 at about 8.30pm, he and CW2 were near the bakery and talking with each other. Then the Akash went to public toilet. He denied accused persons were inside the public toilet having machu and knives. He denied all the accused persons were assaulted on Akash. He denied he and CW2 went nearby the gate of public toilet. Then the Accused person were flew away from the said place with knives. He deposed it is true CW1 and CW2 took Akash to the hospital where he died. Admittedly he has not supported the entire prosecution case. Counsel for the Accused Nos.1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 submitted there is no cross. Counsel for the Accused No.4 not present, hence taken as nil cross.
39. PW11 Shekhar who is the spot mahazar witness, he deposed on 10.03.2021 Sidhapura police have called to the station. Thereafter at 11.00pm he and police went to the said place where police have collected the blood 47 SC No.114/2022 sample. He further deposed from the said place collected 4- 5 chappals. He denied in his presence police have conducted the mahazar as per Ex.P2. He further deposed on the same day at 3.00am Sidhapura police have called to the station where police have seized one T-shirt and one blue jeans pant and one underwear, blood stains cloths of deceased Akash and conducted the mahazar as per Ex.P6. He further deposed police have issued notice as per Ex.P11. PW11 who is the independent seizer mahazar witness, he was cross-examined the accused Nos.1, 2, 3 and 6. He deposed he do not know read and write Kannada Language. He further deposed after read over the contents of Ex.P2, 6, 10 and 11 he signed on the said documents. He denied he was not went to the station. As per evidence of PW11, he was working as cable operator and he was residing at Jayanagar at Siddhapura. He further deposed Siddhapura police have called at 11.00pm, then in his presence police have conducted mahazar at 1.00am to 2- 2.30am and he signed on the said document at 12.00am. He denied deceased Akash was is friend. He denied due to it he is deposing falsely. He denied to help the police he is 48 SC No.114/2022 deposing falsely. On careful perusal of the evidence of PW11, he is the independent mahazar witness. From the evidence of PW11 prosecution has proved that he was present while conducting the Ex.P2 i.e., spot mahazar as well as seizer mahazar of blood stained cloths of Akash. Apart from it he deposed in his presence seized 4-5 chappals. Admittedly, he deposed he cannot identified the chappals belongs who whom. In this regard the evidence of PW1 and PW11 is clear that after the incident on the same day at 11-11.30pm, police have conducted the spot mahazar and collected the blood through cotton. Apart from it seized two pairs of chappal and seized cloths of deceased Akash. To corroborate the evidence of PW1, PW11 is the independent witness, he is also supported the prosecution case. Inspite of lengthy cross examination made by the counsel for the accused persons, they have not brought evidence from the PW11 to come to conclusion that he was deposing falsely to help the police nor family of the deceased Akash. Even though he denied he is friend of deceased Akash. Therefore from the evidence of PW11 prosecution proved its case that seized blood stained 49 SC No.114/2022 cloths, blood sample, chappals. Therefore PW11 not shaken in his evidence.
40. PW12 Naveenkumar who is the owner of auto. As per his evidence he know the accused Nos.1 to 7 and CW1 are residing in the same area. In the said area there are small houses but those houses are not having toilet room facility. Then all the persons were went to attend nature call at public toilet which is situated near Murumara signal. He deposed on 10.03.2021 at about 8.30pm while he was proceeding towards his house in his auto, nearby Murumara signal public were gathered and his auto was stopped. Then Akash was lifted by CW2 and CW10 from the public toilet and he was sustained injuries on head, chest and stomach and bleeding was present. He was unconscious. Then he was taken in his auto along with CW2, CW10 and CW1 to the Nimhans hospital. Then after examining, doctor declared him as brought dead. He further deposed he was enquired to CW2 about the incident. Then CW2 told all the accused persons have assaulted with machu on the Akash. He further deposed in the month of January, Velu and Rajuvelu after taking 50 SC No.114/2022 liquor, then Rajuvelu was accidentally fell down from the building and he died. Velu had taken the Rajuvelu to the hospital, then Rajuvelu relatives quarreled with Velu. Accused persons i.e., Rithesh, Sharath, Vinod and his friends were came infront of house of Velu and threatened out of one of his family member, one will be eliminated. For that reason Sharath, Rithesh and Vinod and others all of them have killed Akash. He further deposed he has given statement before police and identified the accused persons. As per prosecution case after assault made by the accused persons on Akash, CW2 and CW10 rushed to the said place, then accused persons flew away from the said place. Injured was lifted from the toilet room to auto of PW12 and he was taken in the said auto. After examining by the doctor, declared him as brought dead. The evidence of PW1, PW12, PW2 is corroborated with each other. However he was cross-examined by the counsel for the accused Nos.1, 2, 3 and 6. He deposed he is having auto bearing No.KA-05-AD-5406 and he has got permit to run the said auto and he is owner of the said auto. He deposed he has not given documents to the police. The house of the 51 SC No.114/2022 deceased is situated at 300 mtrs distance from his house. He denied CW1 is his relative. He deposed CW1 and CW6 were his friends. He deposed one side of the public toilet road was digged, another side vehicles are moving. He deposed infront of the public toilet road was digged but other side allowed to move the vehicles. He further deposed he stopped his auto near the Murumara Signal. From the said place public toilet is situated at a distance of 10 feet. He further deposed from the public toilet till to his auto Akash blood was fell on the ground. So also in his auto. But police have not seized cloths of CW1, CW2 and CW10 and also blood from his auto. He denied he is not owner of the said auto, he is not riding the said auto, he is not having permission to drive the said auto. He denied he was not went to the said place on 10.03.2021 and he has not seen the accused persons. Admittedly his auto was not seized by the police nor driving license of the said auto.
41. Accused No.4 submitted he is adopting above said cross examination accused Nos.1, 2, 3 and 6. He was cross examined by the accused No.7. He deposed he do not know the accused No.7. He deposed he do not know accused 52 SC No.114/2022 No.7 was he deposed he do not know accused No.7 was not resided in the said area. He denied he has not given statement before the police. He further deposed he do not know the accused No.5. He deposed he do not know he was not resided in the said area. On careful perusal of the entire evidence of PW12, he is the independent witness. As per his evidence on 10.03.2021 while he was proceeding in his auto, then he came to know nearby the public toilet number of persons were gathered, then out of curious went to the said place along with his auto. At that time CW2 and CW10 brought the injured from the public toilet and he was taken in the said auto and went to Nimhans hospital. PW12 clearly deposed he has identified the accused persons. He further deposed he asked the CW2 what was happened to Akash. Then he narrated the above said facts. Therefore from the evidence of PW12 it is clear that PW2 was also present and he lifted the injured Akash from the public toilet. Therefore from the evidence of PW12 prosecution proves that PW2 present in the said place at that time. Even though investigating officer may not collect the documents pertaining to the auto. However said auto 53 SC No.114/2022 was not at all involved in any offence, moreso in the present case. Normally when a person sustained injuries then auto drivers may help such person, so also police. Herein this case he went to the said place on the curious, then he came to know Akash was assaulted by the accused persons. Then he was taken to the Nimhans hospital. On perusal of the evidence of PW12, he has not a relative of Akash but he know the CW1 and CW6. As per his evidence accused persons are residing in the said area. He further deposed Velu and Rajuvelu were friends, they were taking alcohol. Investigating officer may collect the document when said vehicle was involved in the offence nor used for commission of offence. Under such circumstances, investigating officer may collect the documents pertaining to the vehicles. Herein this case the said auto is not involved but to save the life of Akash he was taken in the said auto to Nimhans hospital. Under such circumstances it is not necessary to collect the documents pertaining to the auto as well as driver. Therefore from the evidence of PW12 prosecution has proved that in the said auto Akash was taken to Nimhans hospital.
54 SC No.114/2022
42. PW13 Sunil who is inquest mahazar witness, he identified the signature on the Ex.P13. He deposed about 3 years back Sidhapura police have obtained the signature on Ex.P12 and E.xP13 in the station. He deposed he do not know the contents of Ex.P12 and Ex.P13. PW13 has not support the prosecution case. Thereafter prosecution has cross examined this witness. He denied on 10.03.2021 he went to Nimhans hospital where inquest of deceased Akash was conducted as per Ex.P13. He denied he had seen the injuries sustained by the Akash. From the PW13 prosecution has not proved the inquest. However it is not disputed by the counsel for the accused persons, the death of Akash. But they have taken contention someone have assaulted, due to it Akash was died. Even though they have cross examined the witness that Akash was taken to the hospital in Ambulance. That itself is clear that they are admitting the death of Akash. It is not disputed that in the hospital conducted the inquest as per Ex.P13. However PW13 may not supported the prosecution. Based on the evidence of PW13, it cannot thrown out the entire case of the prosecution.
55 SC No.114/2022
43. PW14 Vinod who is inquest mahazar witness, he identified the signature on the Ex.P12. He deposed about 3 years back Sidhapura police have obtained the signature on Ex.P12 and Ex.P13 in the station. He deposed he do not know the contents of Ex.P12 and Ex.P13. PW13 has not support the prosecution case. Thereafter prosecution has cross examined this witness. He denied on 11.03.2021 he went to Nimhans hospital where inquest of deceased Akash was conducted as per Ex.P13. He denied he had seen the injuries sustained by the Akash. From the PW14 prosecution has not proved the inquest. However it is not disputed by the counsel for the accused persons, the death of Akash. But they have taken contention someone have assaulted, due to it Akash was died. Even though they have cross examined the witness that Akash was taken to the hospital in Ambulance. That itself is clear that they are admitting the death of Akash. It is not disputed that in the hospital conducted the inquest as per Ex.P13. However PW14 may not supported the prosecution. Based on the evidence of PW14, it cannot thrown out the entire case of the prosecution.
56 SC No.114/2022
44. PW15 Subhash who is inquest and weapon seizer mahazar witness. He deposed about 2-3 years back he went to Siddhapura Police station where they have obtained signature on Ex.P13 and Ex.P14. He deposed he do not know the contents of Ex.P13 and Ex.P14. He has not identified the accused persons, so also he has not identified the blood stained cloths. He was cross examined by the prosecution. He deposed it is true on 15.03.2021 at about 5.20pm Sidhapura police have called him to the station. He denied accused Nos.2, 3 and 5 to 7 were in the station. Then he along with accused persons went to the place where they were hatched the plan and at the time of commission of offence they used weapons as well as other cloths. He denied he and accused No.2 and police and accused Nos.3, 5 to 7 are all went to the Shantinagar graveyard. He denied accused No.2 shows the place where after the murder of Akash they came to the said place, seated there where Rajuvelu was buried. He denied at that time police have obtained photos. He denied on the said day accused Nos.2 and 6 went to Christian Graveyard which is adjacent to Hindu Graveyard. He denied where 57 SC No.114/2022 there is Niddemara where he has changed his blood stained cloths and also hide material objection which were used for commission of offence. He denied accused No.6 went and brought one long, two knives which were kept below niddemara and accused No.6 produced one Yellow colour jerkin, blue colour shirt, Maroon colour track pant. He denied accused No.3 Vinod produced one yellow colour jerkin, blue colour shirt, maroon colour track pant and all are shown articles and these articles are seized. He further denied accused No.5 has also produced blood stained cloths, so also accused No.6. He denied conducted the mahazar as per Ex.P14 at 7.10pm to 8.00pm.
45. He further denied from the said graveyard accused No.2 taken him to infront of Ambedkar bhavan building and went to the terces where they had hatched plan and conducted the mahazar as per Ex.P14. So also accused No.4 taken them to the public toilet where they he shows the place where they have committed murder of Akash and conducted the mahazar as per Ex.P14. He denied accused No.6 has produced the Pulser motorcycle bearing No.Ka- 01-JG-3884, accused No.7 produced Splendar motorcycle 58 SC No.114/2022 bearing No.KA-01-EA-2708 and they have stated that they went in the above said motorcycle to the said place. He denied conducted the mahazar as per Ex.P14. He denied he has given statement before the police as per Ex.P15. He was cross examined by the Counsel for the Accused, he deposed as per the say of the police he signed in the station. Apart from it he do not know about the case.
46. PW16 Charan who is the mahazar witness, he deposed on 31.03.2021 Siddhapura police called him to the station. He deposed he do not know for what purpose the police have called him. He deposed police have not shown him any accused persons. Police have taken him to the Ambedkar Bhavar where police have taken photos with Rithesh and Vikram. He do not know for what purpose they have taken photos. He further deposed police have taken him, Rithesh and Vikram to the near Siddapura signal. He deposed he do not know for purpose they have taken him to the said place. He identified his signature on Ex.P16 notice and Ex.P17 Running panchanama. He has not identified the accused Rithesh and Vikram. PW16 has not support the prosecution case. Thereafter prosecution has 59 SC No.114/2022 cross examined this witness. He denied on 31.03.2021 he went to Siddapur police station as the accused persons were arrested that the accused Rithesh and Vilkram are shown in the station. He denied accused persons have shown the place where they hatched the plan to commit the murder. He denied he along with police and accused Rithesh, Vikram went to Ambedkar Bhavan where Rithesh, Vikram went infront of Ambedkar Bhavan and went to tarace, where they have shown the place where they hatched the plan to commit murder of Akash. He denied Rithesh and Vikram went to Hombegowda slum, public toilet where they have murdered the Akash, then in the said place conducted the mahazar as per Ex.P17 and he denied he has given statement as per Ex.P18. He was cross examined by the Counsel for the accused No.1 to 7. He deposed he do not know on which date police have called to the station and police have forcibly obtained the photos. He deposed he do not know about the case. Admittedly PW16 is mahazar witness the accused persons hatched the plan to eliminate the Akash where they went to the said public toilet and also terrace of Ambedkar bhavan. Inspite of it 60 SC No.114/2022 PW16 has not supported the prosecution case. No doubt PW15 and PW16 have not supported the prosecution case regarding seizer of the vehicles and place where accused persons hatched plan to murder Akash. As per the evidence of these witnesses they went to Siddapura police station on 31.03.2021 that too after lapse of more than two years they enter into witness box and deposed. Moreover based on the evidence of PW15 and PW16, it cannot come to conclusion that the police have created the M.O.8 to M.O.10 for the purpose of the case and how police are interested to created the M.O.8 to M.O.10 for the purpose of case. Therefore based on the evidence of these two witnesses it cannot come to conclusion that the alleged incident was not taken place.
47. PW17 Chokkalingam deposed Siddhapura police have obtained signature on Ex.P14 about 2-3 years back. He further deposed he do not know for what purpose they have obtained the signature. He further deposed he has not seen the accused person. He has not went to Vinayakanagar graveyard where they have obtained photos. He was cross examined by the prosecution. He deposed it 61 SC No.114/2022 is true on 15.03.2021 at about 5.20pm Sidhapura police have called him to the station. He denied accused Nos.2, 3 and 5 to 7 were in the station. Then he along with accused persons went to the place where they were hatched the place and at the time of commission of offence they used weapons as well as other cloths. He denied he and accused No.2 and police and accused Nos.3, 5 to 7 are all went to the Shantinagar graveyard. He denied accused No.2 shows the place where after the murder of Akash they came to the said place, seated there where Rajuvelu was buried. He denied at that time police have obtained photos. He denied on the said day accused Nos.2 and 6 went to Christian Graveyard which is adjacent to Hindu Graveyard. He denied where there is Niddemara where he has changed his blood stained cloths and also hide material objection which were used for commission of offence. He denied accused No.6 went and brought one long, two knives which were kept below niddemara and accused No.6 produced one Yellow colour jerkin, blue colour shirt, Maroon colour track pant. He denied accused No.3 Vinod produced one yellow colour jerkin, blue colour shirt, maroon colour track pant 62 SC No.114/2022 and all are shown articles and these articles are seized. He further denied accused No.5 has also produced blood stained cloths, so also accused No.6. He denied conducted the mahazar as per Ex.P14 at 7.10pm to 8.00pm.
48. He further denied from the said graveyard accused No.2 taken him to infront of Ambedkar bhavan building and went to the terces where they had hatched plan and conducted the mahazar as per Ex.P14. So also accused No.4 taken them to the public toilet where they he shows the place where they have committed murder of Akash and conducted the mahazar as per Ex.P14. He denied accused No.6 has produced the Pulser motorcycle bearing No.Ka- 01-JG-3884, accused No.7 produced Splendar motorcycle bearing No.KA-01-EA-2708 and they have stated that they went in the above said motorcycle to the said place. He denied conducted the mahazar as per Ex.P14. He denied he has given statement before the police as per Ex.P15.
49. PW18 Abdul Ravuf A who is police constable of Sidhapura Police station. He deposed on 10.03.2021 while he was on duty at 8.30pm CW41 directed him to bring cloths of deceased Akash. Then he went to Nimhans 63 SC No.114/2022 hospital and brought the blood stained shirt and one blue colour jeans pant, brown colour underwear and gave report as per Ex.P20. He has identified the said articles as per M.O.5 to M.O.7. He was cross examined by accused persons. He deposed when he received the phone call from CW41 he was patrolling at Hosuru road along with Srishail. At about 1.50am CW41 gave oral intimation to bring the blood stained cloths of deceased. He further deposed he has not given written order. He denied he was not went to the said hospital and brought M.O.5 to M.O7.
50. PW19 Veerendra who is head constable of the said station deposed on 25.03.2021 while he was in the duty, CW41 directed him to take 19 articles to FSL Madivala. As per the direction he had taken 19 articles and same were given to FSL Madivala and brought the endorsement and he gave report as per Ex.P2. He was cross-examined by the counsel for the accused Nos.1 to 7. He deposed CW41 has not given written direction to take the 19 articles to give to the FSL, Bengaluru. He denied he was not taken the said articles and not given report.
64 SC No.114/2022
51. PW20 Pradeep who is Assistant Executive Engineer of BBMP. As per his evidence on 30.04.2021 he received the requisition from the Siddhapura Police station that Hombegowda slum nearby Murumard circle in public toilet one person was murdered and to prepare the sketch map. After receiving the intimation on 5.4.2021, he and Kotresh and one PC of Sidhapura Police station i.e., CW30 has shown the said place. After taking the measurement prepared the sketch map and came to the office and in the computer prepared the map on 7.4.2021 and map was sent to the Siddhapura police as per Ex.P23. He was cross- examined by the counsel for the accused Nos.1 to 7. He denied as per the say of CW41 he has given false report and not went to the said place. He further deposed infront of the public toilet little portion of the road was digged and some work is pending. He denied vehicles are not moving on the said road. From the evidence of PW20 it is clear that he went to the said place and taken the measurement and prepared the map as per Ex.P23. Therefore from the evidence of PW20 prosecution proved the place of incident. 65 SC No.114/2022
52. PW21 K.L. Nagaraj who is the Assistant Executive Engineer Bescom. As per his evidence on 25.03.2021 he received requisition from the Siddhapura Police station seeking on 10.03.2021 at about 8.30pm there was electricity supply or not in the said place. After receiving the requisition on the same day he went to the Hombegowda slum near muru maradaa signal. On enquiry with the public that there was power supply for the public toilet on the same day. Apart from it he was contacted F- 10, Adugodi Sub Division. Then, they informed that at 8.30pm on that day there was no power cut to the said place. PW21 is important witness herein this case. As per prosecution case on 10.03.2021 at about 8.30pm the alleged incident was taken place in the public toilet. Then it is burden on the prosecution to prove that there was power supply at that time and CW2 has seen the accused persons assaulting on the Akash. Herein this case from the evidence of PW21 it is clear that there was supply of electricity to the said area, moreso to the public toilet. He was cross-examined by the counsel for the accused Nos.1 to 7. He deposed requisition was received by Junior 66 SC No.114/2022 Engineer. His senior officer is Senior Assistant Engineer (Electricity). He deposed his senior officer has not directed him to visit the said place and gave the report. He further deposed after enquiry to the public as well as from the Electricity F-10, Adugodi Sub Division regarding power was there on the said place and in this regard he had issued the report. From the evidence of PW21 it is clear that there was no power cut on 10.03.2021 at about 8.30pm in the said area.
53. PW22 Syed Samiulla deposed Sidhapura police gave notice. Based on the notice in the year 2021 at about 10-10.30am he and police and five accused persons went to Sunday Bazar where five accused persons have purchased the machu and they have shown the said place. In the said place police have conducted the mahazar but he has not identified the signature on the said mahazar. He was cross examined by the prosecution. He deposed on 18.03.2021 at about 10.30am Siddhapura police along with him and five accused persons went to Sunday Bazar but he deposed he do not remember and he has not identified the accused persons. However counsel for the 67 SC No.114/2022 accused Nos.1, 2, 3 and 6 cross-examined this witness. He denied on the said date he was not went to the Sunday Bazar. He deposed it is false to suggest that he was not went to the Sunday bazar. Therefore from the evidence of PW22 it is clear that he along with five accused persons and police went to Sunday bazar. As per prosecution case in the Sunday bazar accused persons have purchased the weapons. However in the cross-examination he denied he has not went to the Sunday bazar. Therefore from the evidence of PW22, it is clear that they went to Sunday bazar.
54. PW23 Shivakumar S who is ASI of said station, he deposed on 14.03.2021 he was discharging his duty, then CW41 deputed him, CW40, CW24 to CW28 to trace out the accused persons in crime No.53/2021 of Siddhapur Police station. As per instructions while they were patrolling within station limits. Then they came near Wilsongarden, Audugodi. Then they got information from informant that accused persons were in the house of accused No.6. After getting the information they went to the house of accused No.6. Thereafter they knocked the door, then door was 68 SC No.114/2022 opened from the said house. Accused No.2 Sharath, Accused No.6 Sagairaj, accused No.5 Harish, accused No.3 Vinod, accused No.7 Gopi where in the said house, then they were caught hold and produced before the CW41 and CW40 gave report. As per evidence of PW23 that they caught hold the accused persons and produced before the I.O.
55. Counsel for the accused Nos.1, 2, 3 and 6 cross examined this witness. In the cross-examination he deposed I.O. issued memo to trace out the accused persons but not given photos nor identification of the accused persons. He deposed that they went to the said place in private innova car, the said innova car is having white board. In all seven persons went in the said vehicle and above said five accused persons were also taken in the said Innova and produced before I.O. He admitted in the said Innova car only seven persons can be proceeded. However he deposed in all seven persons as well as five accused persons came tin the said vehicle. Therefore from the evidence of PW23, it shows that they went to the house of 69 SC No.114/2022 accused No.6 and caught hold the above said accused persons and produced before the CW41.
56. PW24 Dr. Ramesh who conducted the post mortem of deceased Akash. As per his evidence on 11.03.2021 he received requisition from the Police Inspector to conduct the post mortem of deceased Akash. As per his evidence he was found external appearance and found external injuries. The injuries found on the body; 1. Lacerated cut open wound measuring 13cms x2cms, from angle of mandible of right side to right parietal bone exposing underlying muscles and bone, margins are sharp and pointed end towards the face. 2. Cut open lacerated wound measuring 16cms x 3 cms x cavity deep extending from right ear lobule to right parietal area exposing underlying brain tissue, muscles - cutting the right ear lobe into three pieces. 3. Cut lacerated wound (Chop wound) measuring 16cms x 2cms x cavity deep extending from back of right ear (mastoid area) to right parietal - right occipital and left occipital area. 4. Cut lacerated wound extending from right side of the neck to back of skull (occipital region) exposing brain and bone with skin 70 SC No.114/2022 tags measuring 9cms x 2 cms x cavity deep - sharp end towards the back. 5. Chop wound present over right occipital region measuring 10cms x 3cms x bone deep with skin flap (towards downwards). 6. External right ear cut into three pieces. 7.Stab wound present over upper part of the chest, left to the mediastinum - 7cms obliquely places upwards from the left nipple - above left 3 rd rib measuring 4cms x 2 cms x cavity deep. 8.Stab wound present over left hypochondrial region measuring 4cms x 1 cm x cavity deep. 9. Stab wound present over right hypochondrial region measuring 3cms x 1cm x cavity deep. 10.Stab wound present over the back of right shoulder measuring 3cms x 1cm x bone deep. 11.Linear abrasion present 1 cm medial to the injury No.10 measuring 3cms x 0.5cm.
12.Linear abrasion present 1cm lateral to the injury No.10 measuring 4cms x 7cms. 13.Linear abrasion present over right arm - lateral surface - measuring 7cms. 14.Linear abrasion present over right arm - 2cms below the injury No.13. 15. Linear abrasion present over the right arm - 3cms below injury No.14 measuring 4 cms. 16.Lacerated cut wound (defense wound) present over right palm 71 SC No.114/2022 measuring 5cmsx0.5cm-exposing underlying structures - below base of the little finger. 17. Stab wound present over lateral aspect of right knee measuring 2cms x 2cms 2muscle deep. 18.Two stab wounds present over the back of chest - vertebral region (Interscapular region) more towards the left scapula - 2cms apart - each measuring 3cms x 2 cms Counsel muscle deep. He further deposed he found Internal Injuries: Cranium & spinal Canal, , Scalp - Torn at the injured sites, Skull - Comminuted fracture - including right tempo - parietal bones - both occipital bone
- vertex measuring 10cms. Base of the skull - Fracture present over right mid cranial fossa and posterior cranial fossa measuring 13 cms, corresponding to skull injuries. Meniges - Torns at the injured sites. Brain and Spinal Cord
- Brain - Brain tissues seen in pieces, corresponding to the injuries No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. Thorax, Chest, wall, Ribs and Cartilages - Injuries as mentioned in the injury No.7 and Fracture of the left 3 rd rib. Pleurae - Thoracic Cavity shows around 600ml of blood and blood clots Larynx and Trachea
- Intact. Lungs - Both lungs are intact and pale - C/S - Exudes blood. Pericardium, Heart and Large Vessels - 72 SC No.114/2022 Heart shows stab wound present over the heart corresponding to the injury No.7. Abdomen. Walls - Injuries as mentioned in the injuries Nos. 8 and 9. Peritoneum - Peritoneal cavity contains around 700ml of blood and blood clots. Mouth, Pharynx and Oesophagus - Intact. Stomach & its contents - Stomach - Contains yellow colour fluid about 50 ml. Smell & Mucos a - NAD Intestines and its contents - Contains gas and its contents Liver & Spleen - Liver - Lacerated corresponding to the injury No.9. Spleen - Intact. Genito Urinary System - Intact. All the injuries are Antemortem in nature.
57. As per his opinion that the death is due to multiple injuries sustained. To this effect he had issued post morterm examination report as per Ex.P27. He further deposed if a person is assaulted with sharp edged weapons like machhu and knife injuries mentioned in the Ex.P27 could be caused.
58. He was cross examined by the counsel for the accused Nos.1, 2, 3 and 6. He deposed in his evidence he has not mentioned age of the injuries in the Ex.P27. He further deposed he has not examined the weapons and not 73 SC No.114/2022 given report. He denied he has given false PM report on the say of the police. So also accused No.5 cross-examined this witness. He deposed it is true before conducting the Post mortem, dead body was kept in cold storage. He denied he cannot say exact measurement of external injuries as dead body was kept in cold storage. He denied he was not conducted the post morterm. Counsel for the accused Nos.4 and 7 submitted that they will adopt the cross- examination of accused Nos.1, 2, 3 and 6. On careful perusal of the cross-examination of this witness that they are not at all put any suggestion due to assault made by the persons with long and knives, said injuries may not occur. Even though they have not put any suggestion that he was not conducted the post mortem on 11.03.2021. Mere suggestion to this witness that there is no evidence brought from PW24 to come to conclusion that due to assault made by the accused persons with M.O.8 to M.O.10 said injuries may not be caused. Admittedly I.O. has not sent weapons before conducting the Post mortem. On careful perusal of the entire evidence of PW24 it reveals that number of injuries were sustained by the deceased 74 SC No.114/2022 Akash and on going through the Ex.P27, external right ear cut into three pieces. So also right ear lobe into three pieces. Apart from it he was suffered Comminuted fracture - including right tempo - Fracture present over right mid cranial fossa and posterior cranial fossa measuring 13 cms. Brain and Spinal Cord - Brain - Brain tissues seen in pieces. That the Ex.P27 reveals that it is not possible to sustain injuries if one persons assaulted on Akash. Ex.P27 clearly reveals that if more than one person assaulted on Akash then he may sustained injuries mentioned in the Ex.P27. Even though PW24 gave opinion for causes for death, that his death is caused due to multiple injuries sustained by him. However PW24 is not interested person to give the evidence. While discharging his duty received the requisition to conduct the post mortem and conducted the PM and gave the report. PW24 has not interested to give the false report in favor of the police nor deceased family members. Therefore there is no evidence brought from the PW24 that he was not conducted the post mortem and gave false report. Therefore from the evidence of PW24 prosecution established that 75 SC No.114/2022 due to assault made by the accused persons Akash was sustained injuries as mentioned in the Ex.P27 and he was succumbed to the injuries. PW24 has not given report that he may succumbed for some other reason but no suggestion has been put forth by the counsel for the accused persons. The evidence of PW24 is not shaken. Therefore from the evidence of PW24 prosecution established that due to multiple injuries Akash was died.
59. PW25 Abraham J.M. who is PSI of said station. He deposed on 14.03.2021 while he was came to the office, as per direction of CW41, he and CW24 to CW28 and CW32 were deputed to trace out the accused persons in crime No.53/2021. As per instructions of CW41 they went Siddhapura, Wilsongarden, Audugodi. Then they got information from informant that accused persons were in Vinayakanagar, in the house of Sagairaju. After getting the information they went in private vehicle as well as two wheelers to the house of accused No.6. Thereafter they knocked the door, then door was opened from the said house. Sharath, Sagairaj, Harish kumar, Vinod,Gopi where in the said house, then they were caught hold and 76 SC No.114/2022 produced before the CW41 and gave report as per Ex.P28. He further deposed on 30.03.2021, as per the instructions of CW41 they went to caught hold the accused Rithesh and Vikram. They got information that the accused persons are at Halasurugate Police station, Bannappa Park. That they went to the said place and where they caught hold the accused persons and brought and produced before the CW41 and gave report as per Ex.P29. He was cross examined by the counsel for the accused persons, he deposed he is writing his personal diary and he has not mentioned said fact in his personal diary. He further deposed CW41 shown the photos of accused persons, but same is not mentioned in the Ex.P28 and Ex.P29. He has not mentioned that said vehicle number in the said report. However there is no evidence to disbelieve the evidence of PW25 as they have arrested the accused persons and produced before CW41.
60. PW26 Ningappa Mugadum, he deposed he was working in Wilson garden Police station from August -2019 to June-2023. He deposed CW41 sent requisition to produce copy of UDR No.3/2021 U/s 174 of Cr.P.C. of 77 SC No.114/2022 Wilson garden, copy of FIR, P.M. report, statement of witnesses. As per the requisition on 17.05.2021, he sent documents relating to UDR No.3/2021 like copy of FIR, copy of PM report and statement of G.Velu and inquest along with covering letter. UDR No.3/2021 report is marked as Ex.P31, copy of complaint marked as Ex.P32, inquest mahazar marked as Ex.P33, PM report marked as Ex.P34 and statement of G.Velu marked as Ex.P35. He was cross-examined by the counsel for the accused Nos.1 to 3 and 6. He denied he has not furnished the Ex.P30 to Ex.P35 to Siddhapura Police station. He denied he is deposing falsely. He further deposed he do not know E.xP30 to E.xP35 were not related to this case. He deposed as per requisition of Sub Inspector, he has furnished Ex.P30 to Ex.P35.
61. On careful perusal of the evidence of PW26 it reveals that regarding death of Rajuvelu UDR No.3/2021 was registered before Wilson garden Police station and also PM report, statement of witnesses which were recorded by PW26. Then he has furnished those documents. However counsel for the accused has taken contention that these 78 SC No.114/2022 documents are not related to this case. However the cause of death of Akash is that G.Velu and brother of the accused No.1 Rajuvelu were known to each other and they were taking alcohol. That on 17.01.2021 G.Velu and Rajuvelu were went to Suddhamnagar where Rajuvelu suffered from fits and he was taken to hospital where he was not admitted, then he was advised to take to Bowring hospital. Then he was taken to the said hospital where he died. As per his evidence PW26 it reveals that death of Rajuvelu is natural one but not for the cause of G.Velu. Inspite of it accused by name Rithesh and his brothers and friends misunderstood that G.Velu is causes for death of Rajuvelu. Therefore these documents are related in this case that Rajuvelu was died due to some other reason but not of G.Velu is cause for his death. On the other hand his brother have misunderstood and they have got poisoned mind then threatened that they will take life of G.Velu, due to fear G.Velu went to his sister house at Hosa road, therefrom he went to Viruddhachalam, Tamilnadu as well as Arasikere and accused persons came to the house of CW1 and they threatened where is G.Velu, they have take 79 SC No.114/2022 the life of G.Velu if not any one of the family member of the G.Velu. Therefore from the said witness it is clear that accused persons misunderstood that the cause for death of Rajuvelu is G.Velu. Therefore prosecution has established that G.Velu is not cause for death of Rajuvelu. Therefore said documents are related in this case. Therefore there is no reason to discard the evidence of PW26.
62. PW27 A. Raju who is investigating officer. He deposed on 10.03.2021 while he was in station CW39 informed about receipt of death memo as per Ex.P35 from Nimhans hospital. He further deposed he verified the death memo and recorded the statement of CW39. On the same day at 11.30pm, CW1 came and lodged the complaint. On the basis of the complaint registered the case in crime No.53/2021 for the offence punishable U/s 302, 120B, 143, 144, 147, 148 and 149 of IPC. He further deposed on the same day infront of CW12 and CW13 conducted the spot mahazar in presence CW31 and Photographer CW24, as per Ex.P2. At the time of conducting the mahazar, seized blood from the public toilet using cotton and same is stored in plastic box and seized three pairs of chappal from the 80 SC No.114/2022 public toilet. He further deposed CW2 has identified one pair chappal belongs to accused No.2 Sharath and another pair chappal of Accused Vinod, same were seized in presence of witnesses. He further deposed on 10.03.2021 at about 11.45pm to 11.03.2021 at about 1.15am conducted the mahazar in the public toilet room in presence of CW12, CW13, CW24, CW31 and CW1. He further deposed CW22 and PC 17727 went to Nimhans hospital where they brought the blood stained cloths of deceased and gave report and same are seized in presence of CW12 and CW13 and CW22. He further deposed on 11.03.2021 conducted the inquest mahzar of deceased in presence of CW14 to CW16 at 8.30am to 11.30am. He further deposed at that time recorded the statement of CW2, 7 and 8. Thereafter dead body was shifted to KIMS hospital and gave report to conduct the PM report of deceased Akash. He further deposed on 11.03.2021 recorded the statement of CW2 to CW5 and CW7 to CW13. Deputed the staff to trace out the accused persons. On the same day at 5.00pm produced the accused Vinod, Sharath, Harishkumar, Sagairaj, Gopi and gave the report as per 81 SC No.114/2022 Ex.P28. As per the voluntary statement of the Accused, accused along with panch witness and him went to where Rajuvelu was buried and went to the said place, seized one machu and knives. Apart from it seized Jerkin. Thereafter went to the house of accused Sagairaj. He further deposed as per the voluntary statement of the Accused Harishkumar one knife was kept in the place and they went and seized the said knife. He further deposed as per the voluntary statement of accused Gopi, he showed that where they have stabbed Akash. Thereafter Sagairaj was went and slept in the terrace. He further deposed recorded the statement of CW24 to CW29 and CW32. He further deposed on 15.03.2021 recorded the voluntary statement of the Accused Nos.2, 3, 5 and 6 and conducted the mahazar near they hatched plan where they have stopped their vehicle where they have thrown the blood stained cloths and after assault they kept the weapons. On all these places conducted the mahazar and seized cloths of Accused persons as well as above said material objects and seized two two-wheelers and recorded the statement of CW16 and CW17. After getting Post mortem report and FSL 82 SC No.114/2022 report, after concluding the investigation filed the charge sheet against the Accused persons.
63. He was cross examined by the Counsel for Accused Nos.1, 2, 3 and 6. On 10.03.2021 received death memo at 9.25pm, incident was taken at 8.30pm. He went to the said place at 11.45pm. He further deposed CW1 lodged the complaint as per Ex.P1. He denied CW1 does not know read and write Kannada language. He denied Ex.P1 was prepared for the case. He denied where the Akash was murdered, in front of the said road vehicles were not moving. He denied said auto not belongs to Naveen. He denied he has not recorded the voluntary statement of the Accused persons. He denied he has created the M.O.8 to M.O.19 for the purpose of this case and denied map was not prepared in the said place. He denied without conducting proper investigation filed the charge sheet against the Accused persons.
64. PW28 Dr. Lingegowda N.L. who is the Assistant Director of FSL, Madivala. As per his evidence on 25.03.2021 received in all 19 articles in crime No.5.3.2021 of Siddhapura Police station from CW36. On the same day 83 SC No.114/2022 they have received the 19 articles and he has tested the 19 articles and he has given report as per Ex.P50. As per evidence of PW28, M.O.1 to M.O.19 are sustained human 'O' blood group blood. Witness identified two button knives, same are marked as M.O.9 and 10 and he was cross examined by the counsel for the accused Nos.1, 4 and 7. He deposed it is true after having hand gloves collect the blood swab. He denied if blood collected from the public toilet it will be polluted. He further deposed he cannot say that if the public toilets are cleaned using Phinoil and Dis- infector then blood will be polluted. He further deposed if the blood was dried then it can be preserved for years. He has stated that how human blood and animal blood were analyzed. He has stated he has mentioned details in the report. He denied he has issued false report on the say of police. As per evidence of PW28 during the investigation I.O. has collected M.O.1 to M.O.19, then same were sent for chemical examination and PW28 after examining the same, he has given report and he has also mentioned the blood groups in the said report. On the evidence of PW28 it is clear that he has tested the 19 articles. 84 SC No.114/2022
65. On careful perusal of the prosecution case on 10.03.2021 at about 8.30pm that the alleged incident was taken in the public toilet. Then it is prosecution to prove PW2 seen the incident or not and at that time there was supply of electricity or not. If there was no electricity, no person can see what has happened in the public toilet. Even though prosecution has not brought to the notice of the court infront of the public toilet there is street light, in the street light PW2 has seen the incident. If there was no street light nor electricity supply then no one can see what would happen in the public toilet. In the present case PW21 who visited to the said place and enquired the public, apart from it contacted the F-10, Audugodi Electricity Sub-division, that on 10.03.2021 at about 10.30am there was electricity supply in the muru marada signal public toilet. The evidence of PW21 clearly reveals that after receiving the intimation from Siddhapura police, he went to the said place and after getting information, he had issued report as per Ex.P26. Even though on perusal of the entire cross-examination of PW21, there is no reason to disbelieve the evidence nor to come to conclusion he had 85 SC No.114/2022 not visited to the said place and without visiting the said place he had issued the Ex.P26. Further, PW2 and PW1 have deposed that PW2 and PW8 went and brought the Akash from the public toilet and taken him in an auto. Even though accused has not put any suggestion to PW1, PW2, PW4, PW5 and PW8 that there is no electricity supplied to public toilet. Therefore from the above said evidence the prosecution established that on 10.03.2021 at about 8.30pm there was electricity supply and in the said public toilet there is light and PW2 has seen the incident and he has deposed in the examination in chief that Accused persons went behind Akash to the public toilet. Immediately 3-4 persons ran out from the public toilet and Accused persons have assaulted on Akash. PW2 after making hue and cry they went away from the said place. Therefore from the evidence above said person, it is clear that there was electricity supply to the said public toilet.
66. Counsel for the Accused persons have taken contention there is no motive for committing the alleged offence. Even this court stated supra PW1, PW2, PW4 and PW5 have stated in their evidence that Rajuvelu and Velu 86 SC No.114/2022 were the friends and there were taking alcohol. On 17.01.2021, Velu and Rajuvelu went to Sudhamnagar where Rajuvelu got fits and he was taken to hospital where he died in the Bowring hospital. Then accused Rithesh who is the brother of Rajuvelu misunderstood that G.Velu is the causes for death of Rajuvelu and then the evidence of above said witnesses reveals that Accused persons threatened the CW1 and family members, for the fear G.Velu went to his sister's house. Apart from it Accused persons were threatened that they take life of G.Velu, if not any one of the family members. From the above said witnesses the prosecution proved the intention and motive of the accused persons to commit the alleged offence. Even though the said witnesses were cross-examined by the Accused persons but they have not brought that Accused persons have not threatened the CW1 and family members and may be PW1 has not lodged the complaint before the concerned authority regarding threat given by the accused persons. From the evidence of above said witnesses prosecution has proved the motive and intention of the Accused persons.
87 SC No.114/2022
67. Accused persons have made preparation to commit the offence or not. Herein this case PW27 deposed that the Accused persons have purchased the weapons from Sunday Bazar of Bengaluru, where the five Accused persons have taken by PW27 along with panch witness where Accused persons have purchased the machu and other weapons. No doubt said panch witness has not supported the prosecution case, but the Accused persons have not brought from the above said witness that he has created M.O.8 to M.O.10 for the purpose of case. However in presence of witnesses said machu and knives were seized on the basis of voluntary statement of the Accused persons that where Rajuvelu was buried, in the said place kept the material object and seized the same. In this regard independent witness have supported the prosecution case. Even though Accused persons have not explained why they have left the chappals in the said public toilet. All these circumstances clearly shows that accused persons have hatched the plan and prepared how to commit the offence and purchased the weapons, therefore the Accused persons have made preparation to commit the offence. On the light 88 SC No.114/2022 of these these facts it is necessary to see the evidence produced by the prosecution.
68. Counsel for the accused persons have taken contention that PW2 is alleged to be eye witness to the incident, he has not supported the prosecution case. There is no evidence against the accused persons. Therefore on this count they prays to acquit them for the alleged offence. As already stated above PW1 who is the complainant, PW4 and PW5 who are the daughter and son of PW1, PW12 who is the owner and driver of the auto, PW8 who is the material witness, PW1, 4, 5 have deposed in their evidence that after getting information from the boy, they rushed to the said place where PW2 was present. PW2 and PW8 brought the injured Akash from the public toilet to the auto of PW12. PW12 deposed he was proceeding on the said road, then he came to know number of persons were gathered near the public toilet, then Akash was brought to the auto and went to the Nimhans hospital and Akash was taken into the hospital, then doctor after examining him declared brought dead. PW12 further deposed on an enquiry PW2 stated that the accused persons have 89 SC No.114/2022 assaulted on Akash. Then he has given statement before police. PW8 and PW12 are the independent witnesses. On perusal of the evidence of these two witnesses, they are clearly deposed when they went to the said place PW2 already present in the said place. Therefore from evidence of these two witnesses it is clear that PW2 was present in the said place. Apart from it evidence of PW8, it reveals that he received one phone call from PW2, then he rushed to the said place. So also evidence of PW10, he deposed in the chief examination on 10.03.2021 at about 8.30pm, he and PW2 were nearby the baker, then Akash went to the public toilet. The evidence of PW10 is also reveals that PW2 present near the bakery which is situated at some distance from the public toilet. PW3 who is having garage nearby muru marada signal, having its name HMT Motors, he deposed on 10.03.2021 at about 8.30pm while he went to attend the nature call nearby the muru marada signal public toilet, then one boy went to the public toilet, then 5- 6 boys having machu went inside the public toilet and they have assaulted on one boy in the toilet. Said boys were assaulted with machu and said bathroom is having rolling 90 SC No.114/2022 gate and they have locked inside. He deposed due to fear he was not went save the boy from assault. He deposed he do not know name of the said boys. The evidence of PW3 reveals that he may not know the name of those boys but his evidence is to be taken that he went to attend the nature call, infront of him said boy went inside the public toilet then 5-6 boys went to the public toilet. The evidence of PW3 itself reveals that those boys were assaulting on the said boy, due to fear he has not went inside the public toilet and went away. Therefore from the evidence of these witnesses it is clear that accused persons have went inside the public toilet and assaulted on Akash. No doubt on going through the evidence of PW2, he has supported the prosecution case in examination in chief and he has stated in examination in chief on 10.03.2021, he and his friends were infront of the bakery, then Akash went to the public toilet. At that time he was taking tea in the bakery. Then accused Rithesh, Vinod, Sharath, Sagairaju, Harishkumar and Gopi were went behind the Akash. Thereafter they have assaulted on Akash with machu and knives. He deposed he went near the gate and he has seen the assault 91 SC No.114/2022 made by the accused persons. He further deposed he try to open the gate but they locked inside. When he try to open the gate then they also try to assault him, then he made hue and cry. As per examination in chief that the accused persons have assaulted on head, chest, stomach and back and he gave phone call to his friend and his friend PW8 came and they taken the injured Akash into the auto. However he was cross examined by the counsel for the accused No.4. He deposed he has not seen the accused No.4 in the said place. He further deposed he do not know while committing the offence, accused No.4 was present or not. He deposed he had not remember he has given statement against the accused No.4 or not. However he was cross examined by the counsel for the accused Nos.1, 2, 3 and 6, he deposed entirely different version in the cross- examination. He has stated that he do not know where are the houses of accused persons. He further deposed Sagairaju and Sharathkumar houses are situated in the said area. He further deposed he has not given statement before the police. He further deposed he do not know who assaulted on Akash. He further deposed he came to know 92 SC No.114/2022 the name of the accused persons in the last date of hearing. He deposed entirely different version in the cross- examination. However from the above said witness it is clear that he was present at the time of incident as already stated above. If he was not really present in the said place at the time of incident and he has not seen the incident and he had not came to the said place at 8.30pm, then he would have deposed the same in the chief examination. On the other hand he has clearly supported the prosecution case in the examination in chief, but on the said date counsel for the accused Nos.1, 2, 3 and 6 have not cross examined. After filing the application U/s 311 of Cr.P.C. same came to be allowed and on 6.4.2024 he was cross examined, the he deposed in different manner in the cross- examination. No doubt PW2 is distant relative of deceased Akash. Even though cross of accused Nos.1, 2, 3, 6 and arguments of counsel for the accused persons that the deposed while taking the Akash he was sustained blood on his shirt. If he was not present in the said place and he was not taken the Akash from the said place to auto of PW12, then he would not put suggestion that while taking 93 SC No.114/2022 Akash he got blood stains on his shirt. PW2 admitted in his evidence while shifting Akash he was sustained blood stains on his cloths. While considering the evidence Court ought to see entire evidence of the witnesses while coming to the conclusion that the said witness was present in the said place or not. Herein this case apart form evidence of PW2, PW3 evidence is material witness that he deposed in the examination in chief while he went to attend nature call in the public toilet, infront of him one boy went, behind 5-6 boys went to the public toilet. But due to fear he was went away from the said place. The evidence of PW3 is also clear that said boys went inside the public toilet. He deposed in the cross examination, he came to know that who sustained injuries is died and his name came to be known as Akash. However he was cross examined by the counsel for the accused, he deposed that road was under repair and it was digged, persons are standing on the other side of the road they would not see what happened in the public toilet. He further deposed " ಆ ದಿನ ಗಲಾಟೆಯಾದ ದಿನ ಯಾರು, ಏನು ಎಂದು ನನಗೆ ಗೊತ್ತಾಗಿರುವುದಿಲ್ಲ ಎಂದರೆ ಸರಿ". The evidence of PW3 itself is clear that at the time of galata he did not know 94 SC No.114/2022 about the said persons. He further deposed in the cross- examination "ನಾನು ಶೌಚಾಲಯಕ್ಕೆ ಹೋಗಿರುತ್ತೇನೆ, ಗಲಾಟೆಯಾಗಿರುತ್ತದೆ ಎಂದು ಸುಳ್ಳು ಹೇಳುತ್ತಿದ್ದೇನೆ ಎಂದರೆ ಸರಿಯಲ್ಲ ". The suggestion itself is clear that he was present at that time in the said place. Even though on going through the entire evidence of PW3, it reveals that he has got his garage nearby the said place. He deposed he was not went to garage for one week. On the other hand he deposed if the customers gave phone call he will attend the same. The evidence of PW3 and PW27 is clear that PW3 is having his garage nearby the said place and his evidence is clear that one boy and 5-6 boys were went inside the public toilet, due to fear he was not went to the said toilet. The evidence of PW3 itself is clear the he was present in the said place and he has seen that the boys were went in the the toilet. In order to corroborate the evidence of PW3, evidence of PW2 and PW8 is clear that after assault made by the accused persons, injured was taken from the said place to the auto. Herein this case evidence can be looked into entirety as there is chain link in between the prosecution evidence but cannot be taken into as individual evidence. Herein this case PW2 is relative 95 SC No.114/2022 of deceased Akash but PW3, PW8 and PW12 are not related to the deceased or accused persons. Their evidence is clear that accused persons went inside the toilet room, then after making hue and cry accused persons went away from the said place. Inspite of it the evidence of PW2 is to be taken as he was present in the said place. This Court come to conclusion that if the said persons are not present in the said place then they would not deposed before the Court that they were present in the said place and they have seen that Akash went inside the public toilet, then accused persons went behind him. If they were not present in the said place then would definitely stated in the examination in chief nor cross-examination that they were not present in the said place and they have not seen incident, when they went to the public toilet none were present except injured Akash.
69. For the sake of arguments that PW1 may lodged the complaint against the accused persons as she is not eye witness to the incident. Then why she lodged the false complaint against the accused persons, has not brought by the accused. Accused persons have taken contention that 96 SC No.114/2022 documents produced by the PW26 are not related to the present case. Then why PW1 lodged the false complaint against the accused persons is not at all brought from the PW1. Assuming that PW1 has lodged the false complaint against the accused persons, then it is bound and duty of the PW27 before filing the charge sheet, after examining the material witness and also recording the statement of witnesses, if he came to know that those persons are not causes for death of Akash then he would have filed 'B' final report rather than filing the charge sheet against the accused persons and he will find out the real culprits and he may file charge sheet against those real culprits. Herein this case PW27 while discharging duty, during course of investigation he came to know that the accused persons are causes for death of Akash and also seized the M.O.8 to M.O.10 which were used for commission of the offence. Even though during the investigation he went to graveyard where Rajuvelu was buried, from the said place he has recovered the blood stained cloths of accused persons where they were seated after commission of offence. 97 SC No.114/2022
70. On going through the entire evidence of PW1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 8 that they deposed said public toilet is having only one gate. Counsel for the accused persons brought from these witness that the said public toilet is having only one gate. Then from the above said witnesses it is clear that there is no gates to the public toilet. As per the evidence of PW2 when he was infront of the bakery, Akash went to the public toilet then accused persons went to the said public toilet. After closing the shelters, accused persons have assaulted on Akash. When he made hue and cry they went away from the said place in hurry manner by leaving their Chappals. Then there is no assumption or presumption that the accused persons have not assaulted and someone has came from backside from back door to the public toilet and after assaulting on Akash they went away from the back door. From the above said accused persons it is clear that there is one gate i.e., rolling shelter gate. Under such circumstances it is clear that after making assault, accused persons went in one gate which was facing towards public road. Then PW2 has seen the said persons. Therefore from the above said witnesses it is 98 SC No.114/2022 clear that there is one gate and said public toilet is having electricity supply.
71. On going through the Ex.P27 PM Report it reveals that Akash was sustained number of injuries on his head, left portion of stomach and back portion. Then on going through the Ex.P27, external right ear cut into three pieces. So also right ear lobe into three pieces. Apart from it he was suffered Comminuted fracture - including right tempo - Fracture present over right mid cranial fossa and posterior cranial fossa measuring 13 cms. Brain and Spinal Cord - Brain - Brain tissues seen in pieces. That the Ex.P27 reveals that it is not possible to sustain injuries if one persons assaulted on Akash. Ex.P27 clearly reveals that if more than one person assaulted on Akash then he may sustained injuries mentioned in the Ex.P27. Even though PW24 gave opinion for causes for death, that his death is caused due to multiple injuries sustained by him. On perusal of the Ex.P27 that person may sustained injuries when assaulted with long and knife. Even though on going through the cross examination of PW24 there is no suggestion that a person assaulted with knife he may 99 SC No.114/2022 not sustained injuries as mentioned in the Ex.P27. On going through the Ex.P27, he was suffered grievous injuries over his body. Inspite of it accused persons have taken contention that accused persons are not causes for death of Akash. Therefore on going through the PM report, it reveals that due to injuries sustained by Akash, he died.
72. Counsel for the accused persons have relied the above said citations, based on the said judgments they prays to acquit the accused persons. With due respect to the ratio laid down in the above said judgments are not applicable to the present case on hand as the facts of the above judgments and present case is entirely different.
73. With due respect to the judgment relied by the Learned Public Prosecutor, is applicable to the present case on hand.
74. PW1 complainant, mahazar witness and mother of the deceased, PW2 eye witness to the incident, PW4 is the sister of deceased, PW5 brother of the deceased, PW6 is the father of the deceased, these witnesses have stated that the accused by name Rithesh has misunderstood that PW6 is the causes of death of his brother Rajuvelu, for that reason 100 SC No.114/2022 accused persons have threatened the PW1 and her family members. PW7 is the circumstantial witness, she deposed due to enmity against CW6, accused persons have killed Akash. PW8 after getting the phone call PW2, he went to said place, then he and PW2 have taken injured in auto, he is also stated due to death of Rajuvelu, they have committed the alleged offence, PW9 is the independent mahazar witness, PW10 is the alleged eye witness to the incident, he and PW2 were while taking tea head the sound in the public toilet, went to the public toilet and he went to house of PW1. PW11 is mahazar witness, PW12 who taken injured in his auto. These are all material witnesses, except PW2 they are not related to the deceased. PW18, PW19, PW23 are the official witness, that they have taken the cloths of deceased and trace out the accused persons. PW20 and PW21 are the engineers who gave map and report regarding supply of electricity to the said place, PW24 is the doctor who conducted the PM and gave PM report, PW27 is the investigating officer, PW28 is the Assistant Director of FSL, Madival, that they are the official witnesses, they deposed regarding conduct of investigation 101 SC No.114/2022 and filed the report. These are all material witnesses that we cannot thrown out the evidence of these witnesses. Normally human tendency that some description may be occurred. Based on the descriptions that the court cannot thrown out the entire prosecution case. However the evidence of these witnesses looked into entirety. As already stated above PW2 was present in the said place and PW10 after receiving the phone call he rushed to the said place. Apart from it inquest mahazar witness has not supported the prosecution case, however it is not disputed the death of Akash and it is not disputed I.O. has conducted the inquest mahazar in presence of witnesses. Under such circumstances based on the evidence of PW13 and PW14 court cannot come to conclusion that I.O. has not conducted inquest as per Ex.P13. Further, weapon seizer mahazar witness and accused blood stained cloths and where the accused hatched plan to murder Akash, these witnesses have not supported the prosecution case. However based on these witnesses, we cannot accept the evidence as stereotype. Therefore it cannot thrown out the 102 SC No.114/2022 above said evidence and it cannot come to conclusion that accused persons have not committed the offence.
75. PW1, PW4, PW5 and PW6 have not stated in their evidence that apart from the above accused persons, some other persons have got enmity against them. There is no evidence from the above said witnesses that they quarreled with some other persons nor some other persons enmity against them and those persons have committed the alleged offence. On going through the above said evidence, it does not reveals that before the incident Akash or CW6 have quarreled with someone else and someone else has committed the alleged offence. On going through the evidence of above said witnesses, due to death of on 17.01.2021, that the accused persons gave threat and on 10.03.2021 Akash was murdered. But the above said persons have stated the accused persons came and threatened the CW6 that they will take the life of CW6 nor anyone of family member of CW1. On perusal of the evidence of these witnesses, they have not brought from any witnesses that apart from the Accused persons, someone else have committed the alleged offence. Under 103 SC No.114/2022 such circumstances evidence of above said witnesses reveals that above said accused persons have committed the offence. Therefore from the evidence of these witnesses there is no enmity with any other person apart from the Accused persons.
76. Counsel for the accused No.4 has not cross examined the PW4, PW5, PW6, PW7, PW8, PW9, PW10. PW4 and PW5 deposed that brother of Rithesh i.e., Rajuvelu died on 17.01.2021 due to fits. But brother of Rajuvelu misunderstood that their father is causes for death of Rajuvelu. Then accused Rithesh, Sharath, Vikram, Vinod and another three persons threatened that they will take life any one of the family member. PW6 who is the father of the deceased has deposed that he know the accused Rithesh, Sharath, Vinod and Vikram, they are residing in the same area and the brother of Rajuvelu misunderstood that he is the causes for death of Rajuvelu. Then accused persons threatened him to take his life and also threatened PW1 that they will take life any one of the family member. PW7 deposed that the accused persons threatened the PW1 that they will take life of any one in 104 SC No.114/2022 their family. So also PW8 deposed PW2 stated that the Rithesh, Sharath, Vikram, Vinod and others have assaulted on Akash. All these witnesses have identified the accused No.4 and also stated accused No.4 is also causes for death of Akash along with other accused persons. Inspite of it, counsel for the accused No.4 has not cross examined these witnesses. Therefore the evidence of these witnesses is unshaken against the Accused No.4. Even though said persons may not be eye witnesses to the incident but they have stated accused No.4 is also involved and causes for death of Akash. Therefore considering the evidence of prosecution witnesses that the accused No.4 Vikram is also involved and committed the offence.
77. From the evidence of above witnesses the prosecution has established its case for the offence punishable U/s 143, 144, 147, 148, 114, 302 r/w 149 of IPC and Section 25(1B) and 27 of Arms Act. Therefore prosecution has proved its case from the above said witnesses. Accordingly, I have answered Points No.1 to 8 in the Affirmative.
105 SC No.114/2022
78. Point No.9 :- In view of the reasons discussed in Point No.1 to 8, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Acting under Section 235(2) of Cr.P.C., the accused Nos.1 to 7 are hereby convicted for the offence punishable U/s 143, 144, 147, 148, 114, 302 r/w 149 of IPC and Section 25(1B) and 27 of Arms Act. The Siddapura police are directed to take accused No.4 Vikram into the custody.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcripted by her, printout taken thereof is corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in Open Court on this the 9th day of April, 2025).
sd/-
(A. EARANNA) LXII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City 106 SC No.114/2022 09.04.2025 ORDER ON SENTENCE
79. Heard arguments of learned Public Prosecutor and counsels for the accused persons on quantum of sentence to be imposed on the convicted accused persons.
80. Counsel for the accused No.5 Sri. ANP, advocate and Counsel for the accused Nos.1, 2, 3 and 6 Sri. KPB advocate present. Counsels for the Accused No.5 and accused Nos.1, 2, 3, 6 submitted that, apart from this case, there is no other case is pending against accused persons and they got old age parents and Accused persons are the earning members of the family and prays to impose minimum sentence and he prays to give the set off under section 428 of Cr.P.C.
81. Counsel for the accused No.4 and 7 argued that against Accused No.4, no witness has been stated and at that time he was not present. Accused No.1 is relative to the accused No.4, therefore he has been implicated in the said case. Accused No.7 is not belongs to the said area and he is health condition is not good. Therefore, he prays to acquit the accused persons.
107 SC No.114/2022
82. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that Accused persons have committed the heinous offence, since the guilt against the accused persons unequivocally established. In view of it, the accused persons should be given with maximum punishment provided under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 114, 302 r/w 149 of IPC and Section 25(1B) and 27 of Arms Act. If they are imposed minimum sentence, then they again commit similar offence and they become threat to the society. There is threat to the life of family members of deceased. Therefore she prays to impose maximum sentence.
83. I have considered submission of the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for accused in the light of penology of law.
84. In my considered view, these sentences will maintain the equilibrium between offences committed and sentences to be imposed. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: -
108 SC No.114/2022
ORDER ON SENTENCE The accused Nos.1 to 7 are hereby sentenced to simple imprisonment for 3 months for an offence punishable under section 143 r/w 149 of IPC.
The accused Nos.1 to 7 are hereby sentenced to simple imprisonment for 1 year for an offence punishable under section 144 r/w 149 of IPC.
The accused Nos.1 to 7 are hereby sentenced to simple imprisonment for 1 year for an offence punishable under section 147 r/w 149 of IPC.
The accused Nos.1 to 7 are hereby sentenced to simple imprisonment for 1 year for an offence punishable under section 148 r/w 149 of IPC.
The accused Nos.1 to 7 are hereby sentenced to simple imprisonment for 3 months for an offence punishable under section 114 r/w 149 of IPC.
The accused Nos.1 to 7 are hereby sentenced to simple imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.10,000/- each for an offence punishable under section 302 r/w 149 of IPC.109 SC No.114/2022
The accused Nos.1 to 7 are hereby sentenced to simple imprisonment for 2 years and for an offence punishable under section Section 25 (1B) of Arms act. The accused Nos.1 to 7 are hereby sentenced to simple imprisonment for 3 three years and for an offence punishable under section Section 27 of Arms act.
The substantive sentences of imprisonment shall run concurrently. M.Os. 1 to 21 are hereby ordered to be destroyed after appeal period over. Acting under section 357(1) of CrPC, it is hereby ordered that out of the total fine amount, Rs. 60,000/- shall be paid to PW1 Smt.Sumathi by way of compensation and remaining fine amount of Rs. 10,000/- shall be paid to Exchequer of the State. Acting under section 363(1) CrPC, office is hereby directed to furnish copy of this judgment to the convicted accused Nos.1 to 7, at free of cost.On 06.07.2024, the accused No. 4
executed bail bond in compliance of section 437(a) of CrPC. In view of conviction of the accused No.4, his bail bonds stands canceled.110 SC No.114/2022
The convict/ accused persons are informed about their right to prefer appeal to the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru U/s.374(2) of Cr.P.C within 60 days as per article 115 of Limitation Act.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcripted by her, printout taken thereof is corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in Open Court on this the 9th day of April, 2025).
sd/-
(A. EARANNA) LXII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City 111 SC No.114/2022 ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined on behalf of prosecution:-
P.W.1 Sumati P.W.2 Prathap P.W.3 Syed Mubarak P.W.4 Kum. Abhita P.W.5 Adithya P.W.6 Velu P.W.7 Asha P.W.8 Chandra Shekhar P.W.9 Balaji P.W.10 Surya P.W.11 Shekhar P.W.12 Naveen Kumar P.W.13 Sunil P.W.14 Vinod P.W.15 Subhash P.W.16 Charan P.W.17 Chokkalingam P.W.18 Abdul Ravuff A P.W.19 Veerendra P.W.20 Pradeep P.W.21 K. L. Nagaraj P.W.22 Syed Saviulla P.W.23 Shivakumar S P.W.24 Dr. Ramesh C P.W.25 Abraham J M P.W.26 Ningappa Mugadam P.W.27 A Raju P.W.28 Dr. Lingegowda N L
List of exhibits marked on behalf of prosecution :-
Ex.P1 Complaint Ex.P1(a) Signature of PW1 Ex.P1(b) Signature of PW27 112 SC No.114/2022 Ex.P2 Spot mahazar Ex.P2(a) Signature of PW1 Ex.P2(b) Signature of PW9 Ex.P2(c) Signature of PW11 Ex.P2(d) Signature of PW27 Ex.P3 & 4 Photographs Ex.P5 Statement Ex.P6 Sizer mahar Ex.P6(a) Signature of PW9 Ex.P6(b) Signature of PW11 Ex.P6(c) Signature of PW27 Ex.P8 Statement of PW10 Ex.P9 Statement of PW10 Ex.P10 Notice Ex.P10(a) Signature of PW11 Ex.P10(b) Signature of PW27 Ex.P11 Notice Ex.P11(a) Signature of PW11 Ex.P11(b) Signature of PW27 Ex.P12 Notice Ex.P12(a) Signature of PW13 Ex.P12(b) Signature of PW14 Ex.P12(c) Signature of PW15 Ex.P12(d) Signature of PW27 Ex.P13 Inquest mahazar Report Ex.P13(a) Signature of PW13 Ex.P13(b) Signature of PW14 Ex.P13(c) Signature of PW15 Ex.P13(d) Signature of PW27 Ex.P14 Seizer mahazar Ex.P14(a) Signature of PW15 Ex.P14(b) Signature of PW17 Ex.P14(c) Signature of PW27 Ex.P15 Statement of PW15 Ex.P16 Police Notice Ex.P16(a) Signature of PW16 Ex.P17 Running mahazar Ex.P17(a) Signature of PW16 Ex.P17(b) Signature of PW27 Ex.P18 Statement of PW16 Ex.P19 Statement of PW17 Ex.P20 Report 113 SC No.114/2022 Ex.P20(a) Signature of PW18 Ex.P20(b) Signature of PW27 Ex.P21 Acknowledgment Ex.P21(a) Signature of PW27 Ex.P22 Report Ex.P22(a) Signature of PW19 Ex.P22(b) Signature of PW27 Ex.P23 Sketch Ex.P23(a) Signature of PW20 Ex.P24 Covering Letter Ex.P24(a) Signature of PW20 Ex.P24(b) Signature of PW27 Ex.P25 Request Letter Ex.P25(a) Signature of PW21 Ex.P25(b) Signature of PW27 Ex.P26 Report Ex.P26(a) Signature of PW21 Ex.P26(b) Signature of PW27 Ex.P27 PM Report Ex.P27(a) Signature of PW24 Ex.P27(b) Signature of PW27 Ex.P28 Report Ex.P28(a) Signature of PW25 Ex.P28(b) Signature of PW27 Ex.P29 Report Ex.P29(a) Signature of PW24 Ex.P29(b) Signature of PW27 Ex.P30 Covering Letter Ex.P30(a) Signature of PW26 Ex.P30(b) Signature of PW27 Ex.P31 Certified copy of UDR Ex.P31(a) Signature of PW26 Ex.P32 Certified copy of Complaint Ex.P32(a) Signature of PW26 Ex.P33 Inquest Report Ex.P33(a) Signature of PW26 Ex.P34 Certified copy of PM Report Ex.P34(a) Signature of PW26 Ex.P35 Certified copy of Death Memo of G. Velu Ex.P35(a) Signature of PW26 Ex.P36 FIR Ex.P36(a) Signature of PW27 114 SC No.114/2022 Ex.P37 Request Latter Ex.P37(a) Signature of PW27 Ex.P38 Form No. 146(II) Ex.P38(a) Signature of PW27 Ex.P39 Voluntary Statement of Sharath Ex.P40 Voluntary Statement of Vinod Ex.P41 Voluntary Statement of Harish Kumar Ex.P42 Voluntary Statement of Saiyag Raj Ex.P43 Voluntary Statement of Gopi Ex.P44 Mahazar Ex.P44(a) Signature of PW27 Ex.P45 Request Latter Ex.P45(a) Signature of PW27 Ex.P46 Request Latter Ex.P46(a) Signature of PW27 Ex.P47 & 48 Certificate U/s 65(b) Ex.P49 ACP Permission Latter Ex.P50 Report Ex.P50(a) Signature of PW28 Ex.P51 Sample Sign Ex.P51(a) Signature of PW28
List of material objects marked on behalf of prosecution:-
M.O.1 - Sample Blood
M.O.2 - Slippers of Vinod
M.O.3 - Slippers of Sharath
M.O.4 - Slippers of Akash
M.O.5 - Grey colour shirt
M.O.6 - Blue Jeans pant
M.O.7 - Grey colour underwear
M.O.8 - Iron Long
M.O.9 - Button knife
M.O.10 - Button knife
M.O.11 - Yellow Colour Jerkin
M.O.12 - Blue Colour Shirt
M.O.13 - Maroon Colour Track Pant
M.O.14 - Red Colour Shirt
M.O.15 - Blue Colour Jeans Pant
M.O.16 - Black & White Colour Shirt
115 SC No.114/2022
M.O.17 - Black Colour T-Shirt
M.O.18 - Blue and Red Colour Pull over
M.O.19 - Blue Colour Jeans Pant
M.O.20 - CD
M.O.21 - CD
List of witnesses examined on behalf of defence :- NIL List of exhibits marked on behalf of defence :- NIL List of material objects marked on behalf of defence :- NIL sd/-
(A. EARANNA), LXIIII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City.