Karnataka High Court
Narayana Swamy vs State Of Karnataka on 30 January, 2009
.the compléint ~ Ex.P.1, FER M "M§g;sfi:éte flfid thereafter vifiited the spot in the V"mafia2ar"~ £x.P.2 and zecarded the statemfints cf 'y$#$ E2 and 3. It is thereafter that ?W.§ V" x gbntinued the investigation anfi recoréad the complainant referring to hi3 caste as:
'5 --<é'€ %%-.E'5Jods3 mflzéi 55érwe,s; §€<gi.:§cbJ?c:::1:_a, i,9,3->53 535% gémgy? wgeaa géaim .9oc.i-::h::? gbéw 255,39 §é_,2%§ 5%; éiootab rflzg'/«fig; i&:»¢er¢i%:s:% % épc§ex,&.u§='i'_9e'&" . ~ beat him on the cheekg andw>havLfi§ ";§kéhVn:h3 chappals in the hands to aé$au@€ hi§fi§%€ké§w§i®' with the legs and the ihc;defi€_®as a%£@%§§§é §y PWS. 2, 3 and others. %Ea%e§ft%E; éfiay assured to settle the matt%f in fh§"§;é$enCe §f PW.6 on the Qext day" in t§§ A®O§fi§fig,flé£Q %bout 10 a.m. But, though }@he cQm§iaifiéfit,wfiaited for the 3ettl¢mentTj%é k§:nQg c$m§ "tQ} settle the matter, PW.l §hefiLap§fi5%#he§Vfi§é:fieiice station and filed his c0mfiZ§;ntx Qfi Lth%$e facts, which éame ta be rggflfifiexed 5? figig in Crime No.150/9% and he sant x.P.7 to ihe E13 préfien§é~ bf PW.? and athars, held the snet sbatements of other witnesses and secured the caate Certificata ~M EX.P.3 and after cempletion [>4 '".Qf' €h@=w#i:n@sseé "have 3upportedT the version Of 't&é»pyg$e¢m{;¢§ with regard to the abuse 9f the 47 "3@gord'~with regard to the injury sustaiaed by '%N,1 and further ha centenfls that there are many Therefera, he submits th&t the judgement figgz Aggriavsd by th@ conviciion and sentance the accused h&s approached this Cmurt in appeai. ,
3. I have heard the iearaed. counsei2_rQr the appellant and also the l§arnefi"u;Qgi;5* plaader.
4. The point _that'*Aé£ise §.fof my'P consideration is:
Whether tfie, juégmémi and cider" cf canvictisn éf'Tthe_fappéiiant_ for the 0ff§n§e_p£hi$§éb1é"§fSV3(l}§X} of the A-::.-;:.[and"':§:;;:T;<:;é,~*,f-323and 5:35 of the 192 y is illééal ahd_perverse?
iJ"| . g1:. i§_ the 7contention of th@ learned cou§seL for thé agpeiiant that except ?%.1 name £Ompiaihah{A?in vuigar language in referring ts his caS:e and that ther@ is HG material placed an discrepancies in the avifience of pw.:. ~»..,,} even with regard ta the abuse by thé accused reférriag ta the casta of the cemplainant M PW.1 with an intentien to insuit him.
8. 3% far as the Qvidegce Q5' ?%.;'Mig many sontradictions and 1%' tEe° dQmpiaififiH&"
Ex.P.1 ha had gtateé thai"fihe accused beat ggm G52' the left cheek and :»::L<::s<ea:£"'«.i:a.::"-mu. :és«?::.e_;eagf§:;;: the avideace he fiad statéd ébcutlthévasaault en the abdamen and also on the Cheexfyvfipait fram thia, th©ugh= the ,i§5,de§t'atodk~ place 93 31.8.§é afi abaat 5.%U p}§L fig did sot approach the police staiien igii tag Eéxé flay 1.9., 1.9.94 upto $.13 p.m.§'Vn:L ié~,reievant :0 note that th@ Ma3thi po;icei$tafii@n is just adjoiniag ihe piacg of the *;nc;@en§gan§uihis fact has beafi afimitted by 9%.} in gh:$*'e?idence. ?urthermore, it is in the Vevideficé Sf @w.: that the wiinefises « ?Ws 2 is é u"ba;éiged to big commugity aua t&at ihaugh about 4% to 50 persons witne33@& the incident, excegt the yersans balonging is :&e Community' cf the complainaat me ather pérsans ware examined. Agaxt from. this, it :3 reievant ta note that 5/\ 'any eEher"meterial. in the Circumstances, this A*eeebfi-eee teaee to the benefit ef the accused.
",xerrer ix: relying upon iflma evidence cfi? PW.1 and 'ewegaed the cenviction. Hence, I am of the vmeyinien that the judgment and area: ef conviction W versiee which is ungeiiebie in View of the discrepancies referred to above.
11. ?he presecutiem has examified 934$ » the 982 whe registered the eemgiaiet aeérheifileege eget mahaza: -- Ex.P.2 and PW.§ 5~tee,C§}.y$e». recerfied the statement efi tee ;wi:fi¢3§e3e gg§f secured Ex.P.3 ~ the caste *eertifieetefl' 3The'* whole scrutiny of the eevideficgg lead by the proeecuti0n_.§QS$ date ;ns9;rg»uan§' confidence te heid thae"£ee eeeeeee{ig_eeeity for the offences charged~be%Cedkeeasefieele*§ouet. A serioue deubt erieee as reéeiee ifié page of the presecutien, in View ef"tfie_fee€ gage ehe interested versiee of ?W,§ has noégeeen supperted and corroborated by l2.' The trial Court has committed a grave is illegai ande perveree. in that View" of the 04 mattex, E answer the gain: in afzirmative and prcceed to pass Ede foilowingz The appeal is allowed. Canvictgfin _§i "
appeilant for the offence puai3h;bLéwUf§ 3fi1}§K{ of the Act and also secs. 323 afid 5$6 0§"iEf aw; the sentence thereon Far? §e§' a5§€Qg,LW$Ehé_ :.
appellant is acquitted of éhé above said éhaxges. Court Order f 'appellant. 1. e. 0 *corrected vidb The bail bonds arg'Hcance}led; "a Fine if an' ¢b.;71 N'. N' - 11 .4' ' 2,24 at' 30. 1. 2999. deposmted :;:na;; be 30 .._~.}j,e ..V§§a;atgxxxxaxx. the a&;gugedA'V'i$;sfio_:.+:a tfié-..:r1?a1 court. m' ' ' 9-A-:r¢' Z: J -12- 138?} :
:-2o~m*20a9 iirigfi.3*~%'€:}'?:?§4"!,_i2;fJi_2--3§: '- Grders on Being Spélféfi-E0 E"§{':'.2i3i'§i the iearrzczé counseé f£;zf"£}3& a;.;3}_,%»:%,i.iVg':iw'L:.'s3r; °£§1$ ¥i;It::*:;:9 fierd. § :1 the oyerzativs parficfi {3§..§?"'£.'{i{f"v_':CI*gLi1'-1"'fla{E§§ f5.'3:.;2Q9Q, in tha East 1312:, it hag been naéixiioziriéfais ~_: "-E¥"f':s.':';é 3231:; Ci6pC3Si'if3{i 5321311 be :€funded'_:fc.__ "'E:I_*:e§'£rcV§Vfi1";:§'i213'4:1aAL;:2::§;§,*..'_'. V§rLf;:iVC'é;, it has is be rfifuntiéd is 11714:: fi";31£i"".'g'E i_(.'~?§_3,"z5'>f.'3{i héiféra éhe Triai (bur: He:_};(,§;j:, ":i:*;._£S tijxézi ;..._.,','§."z:51€: if dfitpasiieii SE33} bfi 'z1=:fm;3.di:{€ ii: f£1fi"'V:1;;'j;§3é}}ai1t¥,hi;-62;, tézs acczafieii §)€3f:3I'€ €116 'F3:iaE Smart", Mama}. is Vziiggfiogéégi.' of éjcceréizzgifg.
saié, juagé " >.--J;=