Karnataka High Court
The State Of Karnataka vs Divakar Nagesh Shet on 29 May, 2008
Bench: V.G.Sabhahit, L.Narayana Swamy
in THE men <:::r_n_u:zr OF' KARNATAKA AT 3A;$r3";fi§:;<:i¥L§~2{J?é"A« V.
DATED THIS THE 2% mv OF MAY u - H
PRESENT %
ms I-zorrnw ma. want}; "
x .5
ms aoarnns an, mgaaésm sfimv
CI-HMINALV» (A)
1 THE V
.... _. »_ ~ AWELLANT
(By : 'fiA'®§L!.C+%dATH, H<'.'.G.P., y
AND :
.--a-.-«....
1; t:21_ v:\ KAR "f§IA€3.ESH SHET
p.r;s~*:;2'<ayr2:~§, sauna AIEGFZRI
" ~ R A.NKOi.A",v Now AT BAKALE GALLI
"GA " 'L w " to
V"£.§;LYEKA,R~ C'-HAT
D;s:<r;7;;>HAt=2wAL>,
{;.4graAPATH1 VISHN1} REVAN KAR
A("§F3:34YRS, MAJALJ
'";sYND1C.A*rE BANK
' "'I'Q. AND D§S'I'. KARWAR.
ANVAR KHAN AHAMED KI-iAi'4 SHIVAIJJ
AGE:27 YRS, RICKSHAW DRWVER
OF HUBL1, BANDIWAD BASE
MAKANUAR GALIJ
NEAR K.F*I.F3, HURIJ.
4 F1 PRAKASH mrmcmsnua mus:
AGF2:29 was, our MRFEB, mmmr
OLD 'C"l'YPE ROOM %
NO.36, SARNIPIYA BETHUL DISTRIi"ZI""- e
mnnva PRADFZSH .;« " 4.
(By Sri : R B DEsHPANoE;A.;jv,, 1-"c:i>:.:e..:21 he
SR1 MALLIKARJUN s. MASALI;"ADV,. AS 'A.M1cUs:cUR1AE
FOR R3 . ..
Appeal DISMISSED agakxst VIBE ORDER
DATED 30.09.2002) ' " _ " he
CRLA. 1:3 P1LED"Vi§l;"S.373.(1)_ as c:R.1>.r.'. BY THE
STATE P.P.§~~ THE=: s'rATE PRAYING THAT THIS
HoN'm.F. c:rmR<i.j _m.~v BE" !?l.F?:ASF2D_ T0 GRANT LEAVE TO
FILE AN .AG?dNF_¥T' 'EH3 -JUDGEMENT DT
26.2.2001 43.539 'E-'Y 'I'!_w_IE II oourzr. KARWAR in
CC N0'."S3Q;i20G€)".fiCQUfl'i'ING THE RESPONDENTS -
ACCIISFID FOR'TH:IF:'e()F'_!-'F:'P'i(1F3S U/SS. 452,342_,392,so5(2} AND 109 Rgw SEQ;
_ havillg been hr.-mt! and ' on for pmnounccmcnt of judgement "Le. '- V ..
for qfliers '_ thifn'&!ay, S5BHAHFF«--J.',' dcliwrmd the fi1lInwing:-
L"
by the State is dizrectl.-d against the of acquittal pmeed by the J.M.F'.C. m rrmm). in Case 910.529/2000 dated 23.02.2001. respondents - accused Nos. 1 to 4 before the Court @ been acqm'tted of the charge of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 452,
342. 392. 506(2) and 109 read with Section 34 l.P.C, \9\}'.
panchas and p1'od.uor.-d that kznifc and tmder mahazar - Ex.P4 as per MI). No.8. was present when M13. Neal I-tic)" "'3 accused Nos. 1 to 4 "
sccuxcni the sketch of that 'V and aflcr oompkating. '-c!;a£~ge=-shect against" the aocusezzl charge against acxtusvbd Nos.L3 _ m;;r.i the ofltncus ptinishablg. ééia, 506(2) with 53093.1 and :2 of having of-' the above ofienms by thcmby guilty of having tize punishable under Ssaction 109 of " E, picmioci not guilty and claimed to be t-Jmmincd f'Ws.l 'to 6 and got m£a1*kcdV._.vE}1*$§,:'PA1 to P11, E:-(EDI was got marked on "-:3f the and MAD. N-05.1 for 8 warm got markcd by the p1%u!i¢:-£1. The statcmcnt of the accuse.-d umicr Section CfeP.€_L, was xvxxrrded. The defence of the zxxstzscxi is one of denied. The mmtmi did mt lead any defenct \,_;.
Point 39.2; In cf our finding on anawrcr point P-10,2 by holding that the appeal dismissed ibr the fol1r.swing:- A
4. P013? Ho.'i--:: { - " Bigh C0111'? Government Pi~:=:t~t!pf::r has' " the depositions of PWs.1 't-:1 fmyntentéssv .0f fil¢ documents got ma1*kcad__ Stlblniflcd that the cvicicmfc pf -' and :1;-mm:-.ry mad: fmm aoc113cd N:§s.I 'to pmvc tht: guilt of the _.andV (toxin was not jttstificd in aotzluitting the other hand, the in-armed or.u_mae:*.l
- for respondent Nos. ,1 to 3 suhmittml that the of acquittal msfl by the tlial Court is justified i does not wmnmt intczfezenczc in this appeal,
6.. We-. have given anxiotis mnsidcration to the mnttntitpns of the Iemnescl State Public Pztwst-m1t:.3r and the "s,V5i~.,,.7"
1:.-amcxi counsel appmling for Nosl h.-arncd counsel appomtui as axnicus case sf mspondcnt No.3 and 'wz:.s'dii3mis'37i.-ail digaiiasfv-.A acc-.usc.d No.4 and the same has _ AT TA 1?', PW!-£11133 '£93 to the spot '4 is the cznmplainam. mahazusar --
Ex,;:z3_ the pcman who;
along :ar.'v>3f!.v:1{e::;:rVé*.%.; Nrnl and 2 and .__ mveatigation ffilfiics.-.r ~-- PW6. PV1f5~M.t§Lia1§;:na is the person who along with chagdmhasa. Shambaji and others appmhcndcxi "" and pltwimwswzi them before: the 1 ' -» Pwfi.
1 PW1 has state.-1:! in his that he has V' of oficncc mahazar - Ex.P1 and his _,VfS_!_'*§I1»£1t'l.I3'4':'. at E*3x,PI {a} and MA'). {$03.1 to 3' the bmkcn bangle.-. picms, the cloth used £31" gagmg the moth of the czompkaixlant and the coir strfizg 1.13:5}. for tying the mmpkziixant ween: at the of pncpamtion of V-5' Ex,P1- mahazar, He has spoken to exaxnilaation-imchicf. It is elicited in his _ that no-gel and 2 places and then: is no spexvfic 461*: AA Nos, .1 and 2 or M0. 89.3. 'Hg "can.n«,.--.£7 ta?) panchanama was writtcn in " Ha: cannot tell as to what is of the Ixmchanama or' the Ziasth : panchanama. When he mié 4' oficiais had the suggcstion that is -the acclnsod. It is clear from the of 'cgviicncz wouki only show that when; 'visvas prcpan-r..i and MI). N03,} to 3 . . from fhc spot, A 9. ~ is the: mmpiainant in this case. She.-. has ~ de:;,»oscéi.::: rm cxamin-atic:rz1--i11---chief that she ia resiciixlg in along with her aged moth»:-.r, Hcr chikimn are V' gigging at Bv:-mbay, ('kn the date of the incident, two persons who were standing c:>utsidr_': the comprmnd Wflfl of her house: made enquixy as to whether any house was avaiiabic for rent, It was ::{bout 8 13.111: She did not open Lg.
~: 19:» the gate and asked them to come on me: next "
persons came about eight days thcrczafter at ::«.:?h:v:éj»t1at:AT.1:C'>L' éi. and zzskcd her to show the h0I_1sc»=3n~:E« the quantum of rant and the they wouki come: at '2 pm. 'V 1:30 pm. to the I1011Sf;_' £1Ild 1.13:. 'liens: shown by her and she has _3 and 4 as the persons who had fbr house on rent. She.' of that said two persons',%' and another person was s}1r;vt.>1-t__. 1 her by showing knife which his shirt and another pars-on askegi ta; om the ornaments and hand over the ' took out one pair of golclen bangles 'V goltslen ear studs and gokicu mt3.g'sam which éiaséas wearing. The said pcnsons took the and kept the in his pant and both gagged her mouth with a cloth and mm K latching the door from otltsizrlc. PW'? has further deposed that while taking out the goklcn hangks which she was wanting. glass bangkrs wlixich she wont. broken into Aoctlsed N031 and 2 knew about the armaments \/4:~.,.)\
--35:-
13, PW6 is the Assistant szlh-inspvsiééqgr %¢r.j:=}'v.~;}r%a:«:s...=V-.%'J _ V who thg-. complaint and:-'éiéukziliapicxi , and filed ¢:'.hargc~sl1r_s;-.t against the
14. It is clear said material on that'VV_1};¢f' of the complainant 'thzfi to about two pcmons thrmtcning her and ornamcnts, She has not of a(X'1I156d Nos. .1 and 2.
The pfiflflfiidon his Ai1.9t * any material to show V. that': .._was 'agztczncnt or cnnspixticy betwcrzcen 4 or that Neal and '2 had i1i:s1ti'gzitcxlA No.-3.3 and 4 to mmmit the oficncc of V house cf that-. compiainant. PW2 has not H K x V about the pmscnce of zaccusead Km. 1 and 2 akyng I ~' é;l:I91lS¢Ci N033 and 4. Her cvicientrve weuki fitrther éhéw that she did net know a::>r:11% Noez..3 and 4 prfior to A the data of the ixxcitlcnt and though she:-. states that acmtseui No.1 knew abmzt the gold ornaments possessed by hat. the \§4J?\ «:19» Thg appeal. is dismissed, T1233 j11d;.g<e%m,§=:Va'3i:: ".§s§ acquittal pagged by the Cam': 9!' the -..,¥,M.F,C_;;'_{¥§' . Karwmt, in ac. §o,:=.29;3<3{:o dated :5 ». mnfixmed, 5&3-vices rendcmri £1y;§_a:a_r22¥_iii€_ "ca11ns:aj'.'. as Amiga; Curiae to .-gresefiitfihe caié-e. 'fieégcafient 2303 is placed em fé;~.-:;~,A1+3&"*«r_i"-- is fixes! at $33.-;0()0!' Qfiuyegs th;ré£::* tigpgsagnasg'. "
' wizua