Mohammed Shafi vs State Of Karnataka on 17 October, 2008

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Mohammed Shafi vs State Of Karnataka on 17 October, 2008

5?!-IIS CRLA FILED U/S 374(2) CR.P.C BY THE ABVOCATE FOR PASSED BY THE S.J., D.K., MANGALORE, IN S.C.NO.22/00-CONVICTING x3€}.,A8. deeemd went in an autorjekshaw came with the photoehs and on ﬁe found that it was a photo of the deceased. He K that the dead body of the deceased was mm in et Maagalexe and that the dead body has been kept in of the Mangaloze Hospital. PW.4 went to the hospital alogmvith F'Ws.2, s and 14 and identiﬁed the dead UNDERGO SJ. FOR 1 MONTH FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S BOTH THE SEHTENCES SHALL RUN CONCURRENTLY. THIS cammaz APPEAL HAVING 31::-:9: HEARD gain" RvgsEia.?Eﬁ,.'T '' comma on FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JuoGngE::r,_j'~rH:s -pug, v PACHHAPURE.J., DELIVERED THE F-oz.Lowmc;;._ H "

The amnam has C    A  em % ,
sentence for the offence     on a
trial new by the Sessions    _

  a resident of Kawmmm,
Kannug    of the deceased Basheer. On

1.9.1999, at about 11.00 a.n:., the body as that of the deceased Bashecr. He dweﬂ Bashoer alongwith another person K and on 31.3.1999 at 3.30 p.m., the .pf i.'Tz¢ . havm' g ﬁalt foul smcﬁ, went to tht:

<;f:A&t};e'«..;1eccascd, they found a chit Ex.P.5 dated that he is proceeding to 'l'rikarpu:r to " nt1;:¢ for discharg1@ some obligation and that if V return, they should enquim the accused. This chit . on 3.9.1999 and they gave it to the They about the menace! and found that the accused was lodge and team the dead " A also found that theme was am} a liquor batik: M02, clothes were found in the It)OI}Z1.4 hi"}v,_1'€_§f 'as that of the deceased using a watch and an the room and so also an azeouxiﬁ of by him was not in the pocket _ , A. and aﬁer seamhing the 3d;s..'i99§ ir¥f't1:i;eV writing of the deceased in which the L._ found her house. They enquired the accused he that by assuring the dmsed that he would / [ [ 'm the land had taken the money and as the " insisting either trace the tmaaurc or rctmtu the V failing which he will inibrm the poﬁoe to take action. In t"1:;c circumstances, he stated before PW.-4 that R bought the residing in a house near Masjid at Tflkarpur on A' and that the accused was doing blackmm ~ witch craft. The accused was assis£cc¥.by_ "' and they were informcci by the petsons were not seen after the d&;th..§f £116 They also were made that to the room of the accused " found the djaxy of the deceased, then: were details regarding the accused for searching __ti2e§rcforc, they approached the Mangalom these ﬁacts.

V'thewmmp1ainant akzngwith PWs.2 and 14 v?mnt.§§' t§1c"h§3uSe })f.thc sister ofthe accused to am him and poison from thc shop of PW. £8 Ravindra met on $84999, he 15.9.3999, Pw.4 submitted the complaint 'V'EAA""V'vNo.24E?f..i9S?f3* fame oﬁence under Section 302 we and 7:<.1§§=: FIR to the Magistrate through Pw.23. on he went to the house of Nafesa, the mother of the V V. and he could not trace the accused. He received V' information that the accused is at Ki bus Stand and he went and arrested him and recorded his vohmmxya photo in the newspaper and sent the K enquire about the deceased. On 1.9. V the Pofioe Station and after seeing ~.

the dead body as that of the of 'V V the deceased and mother _the% dead heady and after the postmortem was collected and sent for the I recorded the statcmcm °f the sheets which were in thev_1_1,a;sci~ He made a search ﬁn"

the ,_(;'e11rse of the investigation, reooxtled me" ss§atcme5t"s'§;' He collected the postmoxftem sen 1: M03. 1 to 4 to the FSL tbr chemical basis of which he Iegisﬁen-rd Cam' e sent the seized" artichzs to the FSL. He moczved' ' of the Doctor regarding the death of me; deccascti afenxqck A "

Hospital and on completion of the chargeshoet against the accuscd'§'9i'--~;he nﬁencw: = L' 302 and 362 IPC.

4. During the Rial, evidence cf Pws. 1 to 23 and_,i.nlt:h§eir -g5£':;xga;4k§;=ai»Exs.P. 1 to P. 19 and M03. 1 to;'8'. _ accused was recorded under Vtfévlfcn the defence of total denial and Vim'; not evidence.

5x.4.;jOnn..appV1ecizﬁﬁnn the material on record, the trial {lag accused ﬁn' the oﬂcnoe under motions 302 him to undergo imprisonment for ﬁne. Aggxicvcd by the convicﬁon and " " --:4§§£:n'i:.*',n<;Cc, £116 Laccused has approached this Court in appeal.

-- "We have bean}. the learned counsel 1231" the. appellant ' the State Public Prosecutor. The points that arise for our consideration are:

brought on record by the assezéeété the sand' circumstances are sumac' rat to éfezm a to hold that the accused is the person Véxesepdgzsible the death of the deceased .

deceased left his piace on 30.3.1999 at 2.00 pm. which was a " Monday. His dead body was found in the Nouﬁi Lodge at the prosecution has to be taken into K deﬁnite ﬁnding on the basis of the the inquest cannot be given. Hence, ef it is necessaxy to scan the to V lmow the circumstances stated "}e%r'iiie_1}ce ef ﬁ'iC'ﬁ;'itIlCSSCS and then to ﬁnd out as was homicidal and ifit is so, as :gtw1;et1;¢i":t who caused the death.

10. are no eye witnesses to the incitiant. So of the prosecution depends only upon the" In this context, we have to evidence of the Witnesses and then to "$11. The scmﬁuy of the evidence reveals that the yvimeseege eoneinde that the dead body of the :t'vd6°eat,' Was found lying in Room 1919.203 alongw1th' ne'eessf¢_iry~ consider as to whether that: evidence kcd by " pmseeution as regards the accused bemg' with the _ the said' room on that day has been amply pmoved.

the Manager, the Supervisor, the room boys ml Mangalore on 31.8.1999 and it was seen by the the hotel at 3.30 pm. The fact that the dead ~ Room No.2-38 of the said lodge has t" 'V evidence of pw. 1 Bhagyachandra, the Lodge. P'W.8 Ismail, and said hotel and so also PW. 12 E:t;P.2 the mgstcr reveals that the jn mg hotel alongwith one mo1'eV'pe1~so;A1VV.'V_P_'J4I. of the restaurant which and Ex.P.1{) the inquest .» Oﬁeer in the mom No.2f)8 of of the evidence of these the"'];Vi_ot1_o:A glass, the piﬁow and therefore, it is u H 12. It is relevant to note that though the pxosec'u®n has other witnesses, who were working in the hotel, tmy say in the accused am more parﬁmiaxly, in the abscncr N _ ide11tificat1on' pazade it cannd: be said it 7 _ who pmmased the said nndimmc fmm 1£;?AA.i*a'4t13f§ﬁn%bzi thV » 7 August 1998. It has to be mnacmbezzagj i the shop for purchming the it for the owner of the the customens for a ﬁlm. . ' ago' :1 pamae, the :f;Ww..i3 pmmcutzifzn iecovcxy of umbnzila of the dccta sed inéthtf h9u§a_6f the duly' MO.6, the wrist __watch been necevcred by the imecsﬁgating ﬂbasis of the voluntary statement Ex.?.7. it is the umbrella M01 is a common mimic' avaxlab-' efgiéx;-ﬁrhczc. Even as regards the wrist watch is " " 5 ; e£1,».ti.~.at itself cannot be the criﬁcrion tn ﬁx the accused measly mcaum that saw a watch was ﬁtzm the house of the accused. Amongst the two " ~-«';»V;?iil11.¢3:sses for zccovcry, though om: has supported the version of the pmsocution, the other is hostile. It is noccﬁy for the vi.

prosecution to prove that on the date of the Lodge and ﬁnthcr to pmve that consume the liquor which thereafter ﬂed away with... the .mg 7. The cixcumstances which if hired togcthar in our to bring the home ofthc if V "

17. ﬁts: have been written by the language: in which it is stated bythe proceeding to the house of the Soﬁ-:nra3thacpmoofof% V that it was in the mud wrimg of the no material placed on moon}. The Poiice % ' collected the admitted sxmatum or rm ma the deceased and could have got clariﬁed and the hand writing thmugh an expert. when there is a ?4"" .'V(.j'ticst11on with regard to the cnmmaI' ' md more parhciularly, m oﬂbncc under Section 302 I90, it was the duty

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court