Khaleel Ahmed S/O Late Abdul Basheer vs State Of Karnataka on 24 March, 2010

[Cites 2, Cited by 4]

Karnataka High Court

Khaleel Ahmed S/O Late Abdul Basheer vs State Of Karnataka on 24 March, 2010

Bench: K.Sreedhar Rao

 

§

EN THE HZGH mum' OF KARNATAKA AT B:§£§'_éf}}§i;'i} R"E.

DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY 0? MARCEEQ ﬁixié  T  H

FRESEN?  . 7 _ .  
HONBLE MR. J1IsT:gi:g  saw  "
  1    
HONBLE. 255.3. i3;iN*§'O'" 
CRL.AP?EA#f [.2086

BEFWEEN :

KHALEEL _A;§»51;~.»z;;'"'¥§£? " V. 

S,/C} L1%{i"E?;'%..BD.UE;"E3;ﬂSHEER 
AGED AEOUT >443: grgares  _
Pl?2GPRI--.ETi')R 'MA'.'Z?fﬁE';N.A" ;s.:1_§;D;<:A:..s
MARALUR DINNE31, '"i'~!L'J'M§<Z€_,¥I?'<"« 
RfA*§1s*r(:gosS,'_ ' " 
MELIEKGTE EQAD, 
sA§;33sHLi*£ANAG2,RV

" "  ..'§LI§v!KU.;E€:   """   APP§;L§,AN*r

  SRi_"H;A3¥«;.§g4;g;TH PASHA ADVOCATE}

AN %

  r__S'1'ATI:i OE?' KARNATAKA
   LN, TUMKUR RURAL PSLECE
' ._ '=.""?i§M'KUR DISTRECI'
' . '{i2§:E'~RESEN'TED BY LEARNEE
'  S?{'A"f'F. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR)  RESPONDENT

RBYASRIAVRA R: A,HCGP) U THIS APPEAL £3 FILES UNQER SEC.3'?4(2} OF CR.F'.{3., AGAENST THE JUEDGMEENT DATED 28.10.2006 PASSED BY THE ADDL. [}}STR§C?'i' AND SESSEQNS JU13GE,V"?'?'FC--I§, TUMKUR IN S.C.NO.14/€36 CONVECTING THE A;PP_EI,;LANT FDR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDEER SE}.C}S.44'£%;T.3?6 Rfw 51} OF {PC AND SE?~E'I'E}'~€CIN{} E-HM TO FOR 1 YEAR AND TO PAY A FINE 0? R$.10Qo;j;-.1.'{>; ='.::_';<:) "

UNDERGQ 81. FOR 133 DAYS _ THIS APPEAL COMING 07$ 2201?:u'2a:EA12:}s<:}%,%%_"i%:s1§s DAY, SREEDI-{AR RAG J. DEL§VERED._TE'IE mnesmﬁm % % The pw--1 (Victi1i§}~~.. is vj§:;»;f:or;* aged] about 35 years. She was Diane, 03:1 the out skirts 1'"es.igiéIice of Pw.--1 is in iijmxéng a medics} shop near '."«,.f;:V:E§'1V_¥Se-:1 and PW-1 knew each oﬂsaer. of PW--1 is also 3 Doctor W{)I'kiJi'"}g as im-adicézl dfﬁcier at Honasagere village. He used :0 'gr: Ei%i<:rfVj;"~.'7;n<3rI}§ng and come back in the evening. C311

2.00 pm., PW--1 after closing her clinic caima 1'ic5;:-zrgé. She was aione. The accused came to the h0L1se"**(§f FW--1 and found she was mane. He held her ' ﬁézxda, turn her <:10thi:1g, attempted is rapa. PW~1 in the ' V' 'pmcess of defence, tack a lmife. and assauited the accused ~=§/ an hiﬁ haaﬁ which reguéied in bieedizzg §I'3._§{H'}r*'. Ga': }'1s:a1*i13g the 1'}C3iS€ ('sf quarrre}, PW»-5 Nirazljana, {ha The accused threatened PE?' 1 that 9336 clay V' her, $0 saying he went away.

2. PW- I waited forfzha ar§*:'es;§i..<:3f after his arrival, PW11 poﬁﬁé at 5.50 pm. it is exp1a§;}:gd PW»--1 éid net give campéaigtai wanted her hus%.)an{}. tq giving compiaint. The ac<:i1Se:éT.i?3_ c%§;;;e,rgéé§' fins' Cégrﬁmitihzg Qffence "under Secs. iéV'%'8f,£§§3,*:3?_€n>5,;3 mad with smsoa IPC.

3. "«-isiipported the case of tha p:*Q;§eC'L:?{i<>zi. pa::*t1y supporis that Cass: of the iihf: husband testiﬁed '$0 the fact: that afi::_:' "to home, PW»-1 naxrateﬁ abeut the act sf a§.{t§n1;:€.0f"}ape 01': her by the accused and they Went EC:

'%;E::2_po i'%;ae statien and gave complaint. %/ 2%. The Triai Com': on the basis: of t}1c..__'ab0v€ evidance, convicted the accused for tha above 0f'i'é"1';{ifé:s' sentenced him fer ﬁfe imprisomneni: under-Séc3- :3."'?6 4_ 511 of .{P{T:. In respect of other oﬂ1::'ﬁce.,& la-9_-435015' are' ' j ' iinpased. Tha accused is 1:1 A I

5. Sri. Hashmath tier the appeilant. strenuozzfséy " foiloxzsing circumstances to assaﬁ

1) It§..is' .;::t1f;,e thai mare ware ' batwearz P'W--~i am} """ H 6f' (§§i§f3I'6f1(3€ in the mane};

: goﬁxplaint is given;

_ .2) had set up 3I1(}t311€}C' clinic near 33;'. 'fhé1*é Was rivalry betwean PW»-i and Dr. PW-1 suspected that accused is Br. Nagesh ii}; the §i"0f€SSi01'}. Therefare she was havmg gﬁuse: against the accused.

Gk"

3) The evidence of PW6 if read ca1'ef1M11}§;_.__w0u_i{i only disciose that it is the accused W3'1?§{"-«i.§§"*;he victim of the crime. PW~1 does I";1 (i'i1 a timing about the atterirxpﬁaf ' ;

accusezi to PW--5.

6. The Trial Comm-v..L4';¢£xmmit£ed 'V'e;'d"0r iii impesing senterxoe of" Life "foi'=::3ffae11ce U/S. 376 read with 511 'V§v§a'$€ of conviction unaier Sec. Pfescribéd coulé be imposed; " injtixy to the head. :V'TIié; dV¥.§5C;10S§3 that the said injury could hknifa M04. The offence 11/ 3. 376 _ {PC p1H1§Sh£2};}V1«f§ V with imprisonment of ﬁfe Ar:

v.to'"--c'0n1£iiii"'biTeI1Ce of rape is not punishabie with L/__1if_e5.u'i'h¢£¢£bi'e_ﬁ.1e samtence imposed is bad in law. A 7 eviéence 0fWV~1 is C{}I}SiSt(3I1'C with the FR "V6i"Si{3;Ii1,_ ;Ii1 fact, in the »:mss~exa1nination of PW~1, the

-.3;cc1_§:Sed has suggested that thﬁfﬁ was illicit relationship V% ..,1;§etwe€n {ha accused and PW--1, which is totaiiy cienied. %/ 9' Ths suggastizzzz wiih regard to money ciealizngs alsi) deniad. Tha eviéezzce 0%' PWWS appears to be The Wimess stateS that an hearing aha I_}g:i,$&;z., goes' "iv; the house af PW4 and in thge vcfif'3:1€.i_a 'i3.i1§is'VTf:1f:;_:: ' accused with Needing injury?' on 1:}:_1c§'- heazi;-"--%.T1i€' a¢cii:@.r;} informrsrd PW«~5 abusing fan? ézat shé attamptsd to kﬂi him :««}, '<31: {V§'{i&:V;)ther hand requmts P'W-5 to give paliﬁe

8. Eiuvf 'it :is not expiaixzed for what fo give complaint. '¥'he above 'ciinching enaugh to belie tile defence. Tm: s;Vofi$§eai*;fj02i{"g3f tha learned ceunsei is that the acc2i;$é§ﬁ'~had §12:¢.t3§;f_:§,r:i izzjury by a fall from mater cycle.

'«':'f1a?:__motive far thﬁ offence and the detaiis <31"

.tE§jé"0f£'r;i9:1'§=';L: --iS 4$"vi)0k€fi ta by PW~5. §~Iowev&r, his evidence to a ii1:;1i%;e:'{ eXtent corroborates the versisn of Fwd V' » éega1'fdiiig the prasenae ef accused and qua:€r<::§ between ' figzerﬁ. The eviéence of PW--1 03:}. thorough examirxation .'V':;§;;3pears :0 be cmdib1e 1ere is nothing to suspect her

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court