State Of Karnataka vs Kali @ Siddegowda on 31 August, 2010

[Cites 13, Cited by 2]

Karnataka High Court

State Of Karnataka vs Kali @ Siddegowda on 31 August, 2010

Bench: V.G.Sabhahit, S.N.Satyanarayana

___1_.L

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 315* DAY OF AUGUST 20ijo_f._

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE...V.4G.SA'B"HA.iif'r.4_'_j_  

AND

THE HON'BLE MR.JusTETc_:E.,.7s.N."sATYAHARAvA:NA " A

CRIMINAL __APPEA_L.u:N.o."P777/200,1 
BETWEEN: V A  V' 1'

sTATE or KARN--ATAKA""--[f  1  A
BY DEPUTY sU'P.E1RINTENs:a'ENT 'oi: 
POLICE, MYsoR*E__RuRAL- $U.B~!DvIVISION
MYS0RE.5 j<""a."§.'«;'g'
 '  APPELLANT

(By ski: P.Mx,v'N.A'WAZ,"ADD'L;', sPP.,)

AND :_

  _p '(ALI'@ EIQDEGOWDA

27x.Y"EA'RS',.,_ 

A _ Ego 'LATE T-;c:'PALEGowoA

  MAHJLJ.

A A 25 YEARS,

   Ts/"gr LATE GOPALEGOWDA

° .:"4:"3.":lAYARAMA

S/O LATE KOOGU RAMEGOWDA
@ KOOGU RAMAKRISHNEGOWDA

4. RAMESH
25 YEARS,



M2,.

S/O LATE KOOGU RAMEGOWDA
@ KOOGU RAMAPPA @
RAMA!-(RISHNEGOWDA

5. MANJA @ MANJU @ MANJUNATHA
26 YEARS,
S/O ANDANI NINGEGOWDVA_

6. JANARDHANA @ M.G. JANARDgH.A'NA._   ' '
@ PYLVAN JANARDHANA *  ~ "
35 YEARS,   
s/0 JAVARAPPA GowD.A"I.AH

7. GIRISH
25 YEARS  _  
s/o PANEEsHGowDA  

MIRLE' v,ILLA'G,E,  

ALL ARE: RESﬁD.!E:'N'I'€S_:V:()E.--4V 1;   

    A '  RESPONDENTS
(By:Sri._ :H.s cH.AFNDFRA,MouLI, ADv., )

 THI3 'CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED u/s. 378(1)

_ (3) CR. may THE STATE P.P FoR THE STATE
 VfP.RAv,:t0NG.E,:'THAT THIS HoN'BLE COURT MAY BE
* P.LE1lV\S E,j!:) '}=TO GRANT LEAVE To FILE AN APPEAL

'AGA:r;Ns*r THE JUDGEMENT OF 27.2.2001 PAssED
EVVTHE III ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE, MYSORE IN

 .,:S";_C.NO. 80/96 ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENTS--
 AccusED FoR THE OFFENCES U/SS. 143, 144, 143,
T 341, 302, 307 AND 506 R/W SEC.149 OF IPC.



__3__

THIS APPEAL. HAVING BEEN HEARD AND
RESERVED FOR oRDERs AND COMING on FOR
PRONOUNCEMENT or JUDGEMENT THIS DAY
SABHAHIT J, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWINGTV. 

JUDGMENT

This appeal by the Visa' 7 aggrieved by the judgment passed_ 'by Addi. Sessions Judge, Mysgre in S'C.V_NAe..8{5;{§V6" dated 27.2.2001 wherein'~~..'accuse'd:':4p!ilos.1 to 4 and 15 (respondents 1 to S acquitted of the oi_fé'nces punishabie under Secticns..143.1.1}?-%4;A1.§8..341,302,307 and S06 r/w Section'?-.E49.o§ AA1'._I»3V(.'"xand accused Nos.17 and 18 (ré'sp_o:ndents"V6'"and 7 herein) have been acquitted of for the offebnce punishable under and 307 r/w Section 109 of I?C. The"essential facts of the case leading to the filing of appeal with reference to the rank of the parties Ebefore the triai Court are as foilows:

2. It is the case of the prosecution that Krishnegowda (deceased) belonged to Congress(I) \,%£ _4_ political party. Vijayendra (deceased) and Siddegowda (deceased) were his followers".-~.yy"!'he accused belonged to Janata Dal party.

the case of the prosecution that between Krishnegowda's J"l'ol'iorwe.rs.;< .y:a:1d_""7one Narayanagowda-P.W.62 _ beionging tot',jg;J'a'nata.""~.p'al.,L party who was eIectedv.V:VV"a,s Pres_i'de;1tV"v_ofV Mirlew Panchayat backed, the'"1an'atai'-Dal mvérnvvbers with an understanding that'he',"s'hVoual_§;-.AA[;e"President for a period of o_;ne=y_ear.:25cwuever;"even:fafter one year, he continued with the support of cong:res_s*(1l)""'vrne'tn_be.rs;._The said Narayanagowda- P.W.62'*--t_hen giving contract works of the Pagnchayat toxgthe accused persons and the accused .' jpevrsoﬂrrs were not getting any support from the said ' ~.§larayaéVnya__g'owda. Thus the accused deveioped enmity "i-{Vrishnegowda and his supporters namely, "\;*ij_aye'ndra and Siddegowda.

3. It is further the case of the prosecution 'that on 15.11.1995 there was a quarrel between A1, A2 and Vijayendra and Siddegowda regarding distribution of kerosene. At the time of the incident, we __5__ P.W.69, M.P.Uthaiah, CPI, K.R.Magar Poiice Station, P.W.10, K.R.Krishnamurthy, Deputy Superinte-nd»ent of Police, P.W.68, Chandrappa, psx, K.R,:~é.o§a:9lirgPoicioor--_ Station and p.w.55, Manjunathg, gPs1,gtsai:§;'ra'rn Vp.olitce"» station who were attending m.jeeting,ii'n:'K.:R;'Na'g.ar Police Station, at abo':it'4--..._12.¥l;5 riece.iv--édi telephone call regarding:°:the».__inciﬁennt fjhat one Krishnegowda, ina'ntti..:'>i'V,ijayendra have been murdered in Miria. jxlilvliagie.iiiiinnieoiately P.W.65, and P.W.69_ along with DAR van which wasnin'.the'poi.i§e--._station along with necessary ammunitijonliThe:'.sta'ff..:t.he.longing to K.R.Nagar Police Station. was'~agI:s'o taken. The PSI--Chandrappa and

i).yKi:~'.'.i'-fvns-'-i:i(ris--hnaswamy also accompanied him to the on Mirle-l-iampapura road the dead bo"dies..':ofvifrishnegowda, Siddegowda and Vijayendra in--__a poo: of blood lying in front of the house of ""!l.5dttaswamigowda. The PSI-Manjunath got the "complaint written from Govingdegowda (P.W.3) who is also an eye witness to the incident as per Ext.P2 and sent the complaint through PC-P.W.74 Wag _5..

Shankaraswamy to Saligrama Police Station and the ASI-Mallesh P.W.53 registered a case No.213/95 against 17 accused personsiian-dd':

for the offence punisha.ble«..y 143,144,147,143,341,3o2,326,,.32.4.':§oi'kiwi:

and FIR-Ext.P73 was the'¢;:o'a;rt.W"P'.llV.65.V conducted the inquest-Ext-.~Elx§fl». over the Vdead body of Vijayendra, P.W.68 v*niVn'qt1est-Ext.P 100 over the dead,__ and P.W.69, conductedthye dead body of the spot mahazar as per $xt.P4 spot recovered a broken choppe'r'~~.,._'(VMOVV'" handle (MO 8). P.W.69 recdyered the'*--r:l9_t_h.es present on the dead body of V:'V'ij_ay'e_nd.ra:as per Ext.P 103, that of Siddegowda as Krishnegowda as per Ext.P 101.

he It is averred in the complaint filed by G.oyI'ndegowda (PW 3) as per Ext.P2 that he is a 1 "resident of Mirle village and he had gone to the house of his father-in---law on 18.11.1995 and his father-in-law was not in the house and his mother-

W in--law told him that he has gone to the rice miil. Since P.W.3 wanted to 'talk with his father-i_neiia.w,_vhe was going to the rice mill situated in road. At about 12.15/12.30 p..m'._ he_--saw:i?is"~:fatheir4". in-iaw coming on the road and Vioiiiitm and at that time, Sidde:¢__:;'owda"'-and' v"ij'a%,!ﬂe«ndVra down from the bps and accompanied Krish"nzegowd%aiyiihwhoﬂwere very close associates of_AKfishne'o.owdVa.;:»Thée'_ mentioned below Siddegowda and the house of one Dasharath.'i'ai:tised"'.a:n»d'assaulted with hands and chopperaand caused murder.

V. A_ of the "ac(;__t_:.sed:

' ..l,(a»l._is.['oé"Gopa|agowda, 2. Manju s/o Gopaiagowda, s/o Ramegowda, 4. Ramesh s/o Rainjaiin-ishnegowda, 5. Kempegowda s / o 2 xkameoowda, 6. Krishnegowda s/o Booke A".Ratnegowda,7. Booke Ramegowda s / o iiisambranigowda @ Laxmegowda, 8. Somu s/o Gooke Lakshmegowda 9. M.T.Annegowda S/0 Thimmegowda, 10. Annegowda H.M s/o Marigowda, V3/' "gs

11. Lakshmegowda s/o Gooke Lakshmegowda, 12.

Hanumanthegowda s/o Subbegowda, 13. Hanumantha s/o HanumaVnf1fm'ana Ramakrishnegowda,14. SiddaPPa"' Lakshmegowda, 15. Manju ..as»/n_ Kumara s/o Kolli Kempaial'i:nta'tV Janardhana s/o 3avarapﬁa:_naV_%Gowdaiah'i{:§'i1a'iw!wan).

5. It is further ag-er:rVe'd'V'i"n_ theacumplgaint that the accused pushed'Kr'i'shsne§jowda»,:LSiddegowda and Vijayendra upto_thelvvhcuisesdti'Ruttzsrgswamigowda and contintuedct anddcaﬂused their murder" and ran z'--away.-- V:'ﬂ§fter_:i"-ncausing the murder of Krishnegc'w_da,V','--Siddéigowda and Vijayendra, the acccused wcauseci' "" 'injuries to P.W.2, Vishwanath by with choppers and the said incident is Smt.ShakuntaIa--P.w.4, Laxmegowdaw P.W;:iV.V._'_3-, Nagamma-P.W.8 and Narayana Setty- 'P_,"\fIie'.12.

6. In his further statement, he has stated that there was enmity between the accused, Krishnegowda and his supporters regarding WE mgw distribution of kerosene and A4, A7 and A9, because of the enmity have assaulted Krishneﬁaﬁtada, Siddegowda and Vijayendra. He has some persons telephoned tocthe p'oIicej:v.and.Vth4e'*. police came to the spot.

7. P.W.69 deputed"=hiis staff--~f_or.;%eaVr.;1}§ng the accused persons. thAe'"'p'r'o4secution that after the A4 and A15 at about blood stained weapons assaulting P.W.54--

Ram;.ra5u,fihe'tamer.gr 10.2.-y hearing No.KA 10 1365 told lhiin Atoi¢i.¢':l?lii!'§:sCthenf at Berva village and thepreaftellr; Vthey tlr'va\}élled in the said lorry. Near a pia:c'e2.._called Bett'i'g"anahalli, accused Nos.1,2,4 and 15 After reaching Berya village, thine persons told P.W.54 to drop them at Hosaholalu village. The accused alighted at 'Hpojsjaholalu village and accused No.3 threw his __§:veapon in a pit. After the accused aiighted from the lorry, P.w.54-Ramaraju took the lorry to the house of his brother-in-law namely Chandrasekhara- P.W.36 at Gangoor. P.W.36 got admitted P.W.54 in W;/3 1110..

Konanur Government hospitai where P.W.6j.--PSI, Konanur Police Station visited the hospita:'i«4..i_iand recorded the statement of P.W.54 as registered a case against SJ....a,ccused"'peesons Crime No.143 of 1995 of Kon'a&nt:_r=$V'oilii'r.e'~ 20.11.1995 at 3.30 p.m."fo-ta the'voiffenceAp._un.i.sEiab!er.i' under Sections 3o3,5o5,s'2.3_ at/w" _1éPc and prepared FIR on 22.11.1995 the said caseofile Station was transferred Eiolivcelliifttation and Crime No.215_ in Saligrama Police Station ._ under Sections and prepared FIR as per Ext._jP97.. It is' the case of the prosecution that persons after alighting at Hosaholalu i"'u_i'I'i'a_gie"éi't..V__3'.l'3'd p.m. went to the house of P.W.17- Maiﬁ~ojla:1.nta'r. The accused took treatment at u%:'i.'Au"',EChanna'r.ayapatna hospital and stayed at Dudda. l'~'..W'.':17 then hired a tempo belonging to one i "Mahadeva~P.W.28 bearing No.CKR 7358 driven by P.W.20 Pandu. In the said tempo, the accused travelled from Channarayapatna to Hassan and then we _12_ By that time, a special team headed by his superior Sri P.S.Rane, Addi. SP. Mysore had already'-.yy'_been formed on this assignment. This was confidentiai information he had 'received-.1:'_He*::issued"'V memos to the PSIs, Saligrarrta.:fA.rnorno'~.'ti1eiéfi;.__Aos:_e was to contact the Tahsiidar, SaliiigrarniaCto..._ge.t identity card issued by Ciiomrnﬁissiion. This was in respect of were stated to be the election vagents..'.:()n' at about 8.30 a.m. Sri special team @ Siddegowda, A2» Manja, ._ -A4---Ramesha and A15- Andani Ningegowda. He also'iproducediwthei inmates of the tempo bearing He also received a detailed written ._rép_or"1';~ :"fg9rn;""'Addl.SP in respct of securing the 5 aocused "persons. They were apprehended at the "out_sk'irts of Dandeli near North Canara District.

"'.E5<t'.:P93 is the report. p.w.7o took the 5 accused into i " "his custody and arrested them. Out of these accused, A1,A2,A3 and A4 had injuries which had been bandaged. The clothes worn by A1-Kali, A2--Manja 'if ._13m and A4--~Ramesha had blood stains. He recorded the voiuntary statements in the presence of the_,:'p.a'nVch witnesses. He recovered the blood the accused under mahazgar Ext.'P'1ﬂ6_j..'V""D'u.rin9".

interrogation, accused No.1-iKali:"'gavAe.,'a j:co:nV{p.I,ai'i1nt and he forwarded the sa'r_n'e__ to the Saiig;ra_rn1va,,.Po|ice.1"

Station through HC '558 case.

He produced the V the court and obtained remand Qi';','£«..¢.,!l:':'.'A to Mysore, seized and reieased the same for investigation.

I':'xt.P:;-'.5 which the tempo was seized.' the statements of the inznates of theiitemipo who were 9 in number. On received the post mortem report of A"de'ceaségj..',,45i'dd'egowda. P.W.70 continued his efforts to "trace *ti1e other accused. On 24.11.1995, he __'sier:urevd' the presence of panchas to Yelawaia Police Station and showed the accused persons to them if "who were in his custody and on 23.11.1995, accused No.3 gave voiuntary information as per E:'xt.P 104. A- 3 ied them to the outskirts of Hosahoiaiu viliage in Uiaﬁ _14_ K.R Pet Taiuk. There was a road side bush and from that bush the accused produced one b|oodVV.s.t4a5.hed iron sword cum chopper and the same__:wasV'_~se5§a:.edA under mahazar l':'xt.P23. The mahazar»..§i;as"--i.:writte'ra..94°-._ from '?.-43 a.m. to 8.25 a.m. In spitie the other accused couidﬁnot be"Atvriacedgtﬁrrthe of the voluntary statemehts«.w'giyVenViibyjacjcusged Nos.1 to 4 and 15 as 2, accused ied P.W70 and a eucaiyptus grove T 'Tic.l§ii's::f'ro'ni"'tJhannaraya patna. This is situatedT'V"o'n::'V'VE2'Th&.aV§i'har:a§apatna--E-lassan road and :t__hey--A van to that place. Accused Manjaiiinuthe panchayatdars took out a pia_st'ic~.cove'r~A the eucaiyptus tree. There were 3,ineVtiica:i:"prescription chits. There was also a light coiour"Ved".handkerchief in the piastic cover. They were recoirered under Ext.P19. A1 and A3 thereafter 'took them to Ashwini Ciinic at Charmarayapatna "'v.wh'ere they had taken treatment. One T V' ""Dr.C.R.Ramesh, Private Medicai Practitioner was the doctor who had treated the said accused and he identified them. The prescription chits Ext.P22 has Uéaﬁ __15m been given by him. P.W.70 collected the wound certificate from the doctor and recorded his statement. Ext.P 111 was the wound certifi'cate issued by Dr.C.R.Ramesh.

10. A2 and A4 haci: takereea:meh¢'i.ttra:

General hospital at Cha_nnar'a_yapatnaornej"; Dr.Geetha Muralidhar they had taken treatmen;:t""'VE..n and A4 took them topthe both the accused sheweerytheegeiore :ar{d'v--i--dentified her. The doctor accused. The medical prescriptionsyi doctor at Exts.P2O and Pzyljgvvere adm.i.tted':=to have been given by Dr.Geetha doctor furnished two separate me--dicta::""¢.a_rt§§'fi'cates issijed to A2 and A4. They are at Ext'.'P1"1H.2"";and Ext.P113. P.W.7O recorded the staternent of Dr.Geetha Muralidhar.

11. On 28.11.1995 he received the p.m. report pertaining to the deceased Vijayendra. On the very same day, he also received the p.m. report of *9?

1151

the deceased Krishnegowda. He collected the investigation records from the CPI in respe_ctV_:ofi~the part investigation he had conducted. the lorry and also the bloods_staine'd'-tciothes injured Vishwanath.

12. On 29.11.1995, he'---Areceived..':S"

certificates issued by l5'ir.CVijayalVa.!{_s'i1i.~.«1i,'°;:LM0 oft Elawala. Exts.P43 to'*~P47;°areitiie"woundicertificates in respect of A1 to A4 and isveiied the articles and sent tlfieinﬁptito FSL. 'vi?}ang:a'i.ore..V.7He also received the v:(ea_pon's'Vv.av!_o'ngi'vvivth'opinion in sealed packets. Ext.P7é2'*--___is_ t'h_e7:' opinion issued in respect of Kri.3:hVnegow'd'a_.V:Ext.P115 is the opinion furnished in respec't_ufvxi'njured Vishwanath. Ext.P35 is the opinion .fuir.nis'h:E.-_d__iifrespect of deceased Vijayendra. Ext.P68 is'""the°-V:&o'p'§nion furnished for having examined the 'weapons. He also obtained Ext.P116, the certificate "containing the opinion of Dr.Vijaya|akshmi.

13. On 9.1.1996, he received the sketch of the scene of occurrence from Asst. Engineer vi» -17- C.Ramesh, FWD, K R Nagar. On 24,1,1996, he received orders from DPO, Mysore to file B-Rep_ort in Cr.No.219/95 of Saiigrama Police Etatiiovn. Accordingly, a report was filed.

14. On 25.01.1996, he received:'FSi.--l.::repovrt..,,1"

and also serology report from oneSci.enti'fic'r.Gffic.er' Sri.Siddaramaiah, Bangalore. 17 arid"; serology report. on 29,1,1V9as, he receivedfthe final wound certificate i'n,_._'res;.gect.Aoﬂinjured Vishwanath. Ext.P91 is the_report...per--tainihgito 'iwounds found on the pei*sor:.of4'inju'r:eid._Vishwanath.

15. ..P.w.7'ﬂf~.ma_d*e.<efforts to trace the other accu_sed-M8'.

'15. On.._14.3.;1996 at about 10.50 p.m. he ."t"h.e anticipatory bail order in respect of and 18. They appeared before him and heiarrfested and enlarged them on bail. After the

1. inyest'igation was over, he submitted charge sheet 'ag'a'inst the accused Nos.1 to 4, 15, 17 and 18. \51g«€ __18__

17. Since the offence alleged against the accused is triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Sessions Judge. Charges___were framed against accused Nos.1 to 4 and 15 for"vh"a.\i'i'n'g committed the offences punishable urxdfei-r 143,144, 148,341,302 read with... secgtioii ':'.'144'9,.'_'_ 3.3073' "

read with Section 149 and 50¢-rea'_d'*witi2 ' of IPC and as againstii-.,:accusec!,__ 18-3 charges were framed fo.r--whaving committed the offence punishablei"iuti--dcr,,,i'Ls.ectii§i{-302 read with Section 109 a:n.::_l_ 3Q'7'_:vuiiith section 109 of me. All the acciiiclcd-.;§fic,adcd._not guilty and claimed to be tried. 3 it it

"18. The piriosecution has examined 75 witnesses 75 and got marked Exts.P1 to P130 and iaii:;()'s.1 to 24 in support of its case. 20 do"cum'en'ts have been marked on behalf of the

3. accused as Exts.D1 to D20. No witnesses were "'.e5ta'mined on behalf of the accused. The statement "of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C was recorded. The accused did not lead any defence W evidence.

_19m

19. The learned Sessions Judge after hearing the learned State Public Prosecutor and the learned Counsel appearing for accused Nos.1 to 4, 15, '1.'7'»dand 18, in his judgment dated 27.2.2001 following points for his consi_de'r_a»tVio»:i§' determination:

"1) Whether the that on *4' 1andHlA1s in between 5' at formed members of an with the ohject of committing the :A.n:tir{ler of Krishnegowda, and Siddegowda and 'L.tl'1':e;reby committed the offence "punishable under Sec. 143 of I.P.C.

beyond all reasonable doubts or W E1012?

m20_

2) Whether the prosecution proves that on the said date, time and place, the accused named above being the members of unlawft;e'i"-4'.".'_'i' assembiy being armed with d_eacI:iyVV':wA.i."' weapons like choppers; andt'At.hetreb'y--: '' ' committed an offenceéV"pVti'nishaﬁ-Sea. under Section 144 ail reasonabiedoubts. o"r~no_ t'?_ that clate, time and p'i--a_ce_, VtheA.'acc;,Ised named above it formed«..ti1emV-selves into an unlawfui iassernbiy and in pursuance of their ""ciJ'_mri3'oVn object were armed with v--._'§e'a"eiy weapons like choppers ane 'committed the offence of rioting punishable under section 148 o§ I.P.C. beyond ali reasonable doubts E or not?

4*"""~.

M21_

4) Whether the prosecution proves that on the said date, time and Place, the accused 1 to 4 and 15 being the members of unlawfu«!...J,'_:

assembly and in pursuance common object restrained _4 Krishnegoviida,v" A' Vijayendra and Mirle--K.R Na§ja.r residentialiivy house of one and from pmcii¢¢c:;nfg ,,»'i'n::a--._direction in which they _ i'ntended'_.»i."to proceed and there'bv..V:VV committed an offence pu--nii'sh_abIe under section 341 read AVV"iai_i_ti1'~i§;,.Sec.149 of I.P.C. beyond all 'reasonable doubts or not?

5) Whether the prosecution proves that on the said date, time and place, the accused 1 to 4 and 15 being the members of unlawful \/Qigré -22- assembly and in pursuance of their common object , committed the murder of Krishnegowd-E.3«;.._'4y'9 Vijayendra and Siddegowda.V__y""hyj'=.""

intentionally causingv"Mdeath._ assaulting them with choppers " "

thereby committedywvan punishable u'i'n~d_er read"

with Sec. 149 for ir.i>;ic..f--..|§éyy:s;1d all reasonarbyle doubt-st or.

6) ~ pgosecution proves thati yon'_thye= date, time and replace" to 4, and 15 being the members of unlawful assembly and pursuance of their common "----'obj?ect, assaulted CW.2 Vishwanath Vvwwith chopper when he had come to the rescue of deceased Krishnegowda, Vijayendra and Siddegowda and thereby committed an offence punishable under section K'?

is w23_ 307 read with Section 149 of }:.P.C. beyond all reasonable doubts or not?

7) Whether the proves that on tE1:_e'.«~..§aid"'-date, and place A-_1 to beirigpthevvvfi members of "ii-ii|.aii:fLii ivalssembly and in p1!i'~SUal1:C'€""' -- of' * .ti1_eir' ; yyicommon object, 5:af:tevr'j'«conz1m_itti rder of _ __ " llijai?'endra and Siddeg.owTda"=aTnd inflicting injuries 'to * Vishyyanath wrongfully iA.restrai.n:ed :CW.40 while he was ~i.proce_eding in his lorry bearing No :'iVKvA~'i;C3;1365 and criminally "~--':&Vini':.imidated himi with dire consequences by showing chopper and forcibly took th_e lorry and sped away from the scene of occurrence to Betaganahalli --- Berya road and thereby committed an offence -24- punishabie under section 506 read with section 149 of I.P.C. beyond all reasogﬁabie doubts or not ?

8) Whether the prose:-¢oti'o'i*.aprroveis' that A-17 and A-1.3 on theisaid da.i:e}" * it 5 time and piace insisicjated and 15 and .aiaette'd"the; comémissvion"

. of murder 5-of 5 Vija\_4~veng;[:i*a :=A__and.:.f by :3cho|§pe'rs.'.:ito':_m'ake use of the.rn'iVforV"rth'e:"'vvc_ommission of the offence''' and-Vdalso provided Hero aeHond'a..V_VTMo'tor byke for the transvportation of weapons made 'of'V..by A-1 to 5 and 15 and also "---Vifiorfithe movement of A--1 and A-3 direspectively and thereby committed the offence punishable under section 302 read with section 109 of I.P.C. beyond reasonable doubts or \Hf'> not?

W25."

9) Whether the prosecution proves that A-17 and A-18 on the said date, time and place instigated A-1 and 15 to assauit CW.2...V»ishwa'n'athjV,if' ' when he came to the deceased KrishnegiowdaiiiViiiayernidirdglt...

and Siddegowda   prov'*i:d:i:ngt%
weapons avndii' T a iso    ' H on d a,
respectiygiy   
  the
_        Sectio n

:¥_ 392?Aiireadi:w.i>th_itSection 149 of I.P.C :a"i'E:' :.r:é*.-asoinabie doubts or ﬂat? " _ .

_ What order?"

'v"';The Eearned Sessions Judge after .aer,m_.sidVering the ocular and documentary evidence 'ansvvered point Nos.1 ' to 9 in the negative and point "No.10 as per the final order and accordingly acquitted A1 to A4 and A15 for the offence we _26m.

punishable under Sections 143,1-44,148,341,302,307 and 506 r/w 149 IPC and acquitted A17 and A18 for the offence punishable under Sections 302 arafd-.307 r/w 109 IPC and it is aggrieved judgment of acquittal, this appeal State contending that the Sessions, has not properly appreciated t4he:'e.viden.c,e':on and the prosecution has 'p'r:o'ved bey_o'i1d1 réasonableii doubt the offencesva'llVeged.Ha_gainst-the accused. learned SPP for the appeIiant« and Counsel appearing for the respondeintsv/accused"sNos.1 to 4, 15, 17 and 18 '1 V' , 'before-V.th'le'triail' 'Court. regard to the contentions urged, the "points that arise for our determination in this 'appieal are:

i) Whether the finding of the Trial Court that the Prosecution has failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused Nos.1 to 4 and 15 have W _27W committed the offences punishabie under Sections 143, 144, 148, 341, 302, 307, 505 R/w Section of 149,,bt, I.P.C. is justified and acquitting":V:t'he_:"-.

accused calis for interference-'in 4A:'t"hTi,j's----,A appeal?

ii) Whether the rihdingetrthe 'fr§.al'~Coui{t'~..A,"f" that the prose_cution"' has f'fai'i«e'd-»»...to prove that the accused Nos..i_7 and 18 have vco'mm_itte:di" offences punishable ._und~e~i" 302 R/w anr.i~3o7innit/wigseetjioph '1Qf9"of Inc and 4_,acqg§iiitting.tiae ac$:jused"Nos.17 and 18 """ H _vju§ftVi'fied.,:"andicalfyls for interference " 4' in jtitwise. ' *ii_i) 4u\:'JhVat"'or.ciez:?

' ;We.answ:er:"the above points as foliows:

' * "Point (i) -- the finding of the trial Court is V " justified and does not call for interference in 3 this appeal.

I \\W<:,;,§> .4

-23"

Point (ii) -- the finding of the trial Qourt is justified and does not call for interfer.ejn_ce_' in this appeal. V ' Point (iii) ---- as pe'rAtfa'_:'e 'final. following: i i it ' ~.._REAsor~:s

-:......a pa

23. to bring home guilt of the evidences of PW-1__toV'to P---13o and Exhibits D-1 ._ by the accused in the evidenceof thVe_p'n?oset_;ution and the M.O.s 1 to 24. DPWS-1 to 6 and PW-9 and PW-10 are eye ~v\i'iti1Ae's§]e_vs_ tothe incident. Among them, PW-2, who isuan ivn:j.u'i'ed is the eye witness to the same incident. V. Pwfsvvﬂagamma is the sister-in-law of the father of 7aVcc'used Nos.3 and 4 and she has been examined to "show that accused Nos.3 and 4 had come to their house on the day prior to the date of the incident and the accused Nos.1 and 2 called accused Nos.3 W M29_ and 4 saying that they are having urgent work and went towards the house of Basavanagowda. However, PW-8 has not supported the case .o"f.yythe prosecution and was treated as permitted to cross-examine by Prosecutor. Nothing has bee:nmei'Ecite*d i:r1.i[_1"erV.cross'e. examination to support the case. of the

25. PW--9 eye"-witness to the incident has atso riot case of the prosecution'. "'i;E!owever',"': in yithe .__cross--examination, she has --.p'artE'y. the case of the prosecution. 'V26. Vijayamrna, is the eldest daughter .' _Vi5Ii..S.AKr4iVs'ianegowda (deceased) and she has been H 'e$c'a.mvVinaec£.. tot'. prove the motive and extra-judicial confession by accused Nos.1 to 4 and 15.

27. Pw--12 Narayanasetty is the father of it "Vijayendra (deceased) and he has deposed in his evidence about the motive that on 18.11.1995, Sujaya came in a scooter and told that Krishnegowda we

-30"

is calling Vijayendra and Siddegowda and took them towards the house of Srinivas. The evidence of this witness has remained un-controverted.

28. PW-13 Lakshmegowda brother of Siddegowda (decc;é;alse:d')«; it examined to prove the motive'--an'el heeh"asV"spoE:e"n about the information received the people about the. .'V"l:)'rotherV'Siddegowda and aiso Krishnegowd'aAV_an'dl'irijavheléjdra. 1,29. .VP'\l:'J%-1:4.Lo!:araju", who is the owner of land is a pa'nch ,vwit_ne.ss.:'t;f_oExhibit P-6 wherein M.Os. 5 an.é;l'V6~ havev--..Vbe_en recovered under the Mahazar .A ;(!E;)V(hil:b'it 9:1~1_7).

Z PW-15 lVl.T.Krishnamurthy is the panch 'witness of spot mahazar Exhibit P4 and recovered piece of sword and IVLO-8 wooden handle and it "chopper. The evidence of this witness has also remained un-controverted, as he has not been cross- examined by the learned counsel for the accused. 'gag -32- However, he has not supported the case of the prosecution and he is treated as hostile and nothing has been elicited in his cross-examination toxsupipo_rt the case of the prosecution.

34. pw-19 Srikanth, pv'v,-2:);iPén'du"~é:hd:'ii$w?'21 Arun have also travelled' ._along with the "«é.__Cc~uséd in'-L' the tempo towards. DandeilA'i'~.__a'n_,d th"e.__ten;apo was intercepted near .po»lice. However, none of these:'witnes'ses-fihave..'supported the case of the been elicited in their:V.crossi§e5c.arn'ination. to support the case of the proseciutijond V i it

35. PW.-_.V:2V3 l..:.Shivaswamy is a panch witness . to.':Exhivb%it:P--+15 regarding seizure mahazar of tempo ~bVea_a-ing-,iV'"_"_v,No~.,'C"i(A 7358. However, he has also not su'.ﬁpo'rte'd'.V' the case of the prosecution and was 'treated hostile and permitted to cross-examine by learned Public Prosecutor. Nothing has been it "elicited in his cross-examination to support the case of the prosecution.

Xkgfg ._33_

36. PW-25 Siddaiah is also a panch witness to Exhibit P-16 (seizure mahazar of cloth) along with PW-24 Nagaraja and they have also not sup.po.rted the case of the prosecution and nothin;_j""ha_si...:i5$e'n_ elicited in their cross-examination case of the prosecution.

37. PW-26 Gowdkvev.'_Papanna._VV:is Vvfa panch witness to iExhibit._"':%«-P~:;i_;5 1-'.ia'nd_'».,z'he_p has also not supporteclrgthei::;:{c_aseb'thevjprosecution and was treated '-hostjiiefa:n»d'u'*p_e'I'*xnitted to cross-examine by the learned. i5iu.bVl'i;"P:._rosecutor. Nothing has been elicited in his"~cro_ss-examination to support the case ' tVhe,__prosec.ution.

"PW-27 Manju who accompanied PW-17 l'vlar.rojH'Kumar states that along with the accused travelled in the Tempo to Dandeli. However, he V "has also not supported the case of the prosecution and was treated as hostile and permitted to cross- examine by the learned Public Prosecutor. Nothing 'Q9 w34._ has been elicited in his cross-examination to support the case of the prosecution.

39. PW-28 Mahadev has also trave!»!.eid'»V.i'ni:ithe tempo along with the accused to Dandeli.-..'However;_ he has also not supporteldm prosecution and was treated as---hostiieg :iiotih'i"ng"g has been elicited in his cros's§examina_ticii toisupport the case of the prosec:1tio_n..iiiV_ _ _ V

40. PW-29 T.l\&i.iI-i_arishV' an_¢«.g»w'-«so C.R.Umesh are pianch Exhibits P-19, wherein the prescriptions' a't_.iE:ai.(il"si:l§'i_.!:siP-20 and P-21were seized on,,t%he basis"of_.ithe voluntary statement given by the .iacci:seici..AN:o.,:l_ to 4 and 15. However, both the iii'kvVitness'téS--__v\'i;ére treated as hostile and nothing has been eli.ci'ted in their cross--examination to support it theacasie of the prosecution.

41. PW-31 Sannappa and PW-32 Venkatesh "are the panch witnesses to Exhibit P-23 (seizure mahazar of chopper) regarding recovery of sword r*"'% is _35_1 based on the voluntary statement of PW-32. However, both of these witnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution and treated_ as hostile and nothing has been elicited examination to support the case of the 2

42. PW-33 Venkatasw'air;»y 1 Ramachandra are panchiivwiitnesses.'toe.'-:E§thibit P--6 relating to seizurefof swords in the field of PW-14 iioigae,-r.i;nnais+, pe}a',i;,1...o.6. However, b0t|1:,jv0f _s_upported the case of the proseciiti'on and:ﬂtreated""as hostile and nothing has been. eliciuted their".cross--examination to support . it theéicase of__the prosecution. ' G.K.Satisha who is a panch witness to ill'-_'x.lii.!;)itxP--24 regarding the seizure of lorry bearing xl5lo"...l-A(AH'10 1355 on 25.11.1995 belonging to his brother and sister--in-law. However, he has also Vwnot supported the case of the prosecution and treated as hostile and nothing has been elicited in W _m36M his cross-examination to support the case of the prosecution.

44. PW-36 Chandrashekara is the brother-in- iaw of the owner of the lorry has deposed about taking IVE.A.Ramarajuf:{.?iail-54);to the hospital as he complained ioféxflcliestl ' evidence of this witness V7h_a's re'muain_ed_V'§ controverted but is not he4l'p.'f:u:_to the._VV:prosvVe:acution to prove the guilt of tli_ejp'~a_cc5Vus,ed." _ has been examined to prove fi'1.§3" mo't_ive, he is a member of the Mirle Similarly, PW-38 Prakash is aiso i the Mirle Grama Panchayath and has to prove the motive. However, both th'ese'*v.vv'itnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution and treated as hostile and nothing has ﬂhelen elicited in their cross-examination to support the case of the prosecution.

U?

_.37_

46. PW-39 Dilip Kumar has been examined to prove that while he was studying in PUC in tVhedP.re~ University College in their Village Mirle, _ accused No.3 (Jayarama) on 13.11.1993.l%:§::nglya... motor cycle along with the Iaccus.ed'-.i\lo_.14'(.Ka_li..,.@ Siddegowda) and they chased them and were running they met'v~..odraeV (son of Siddegowda) on and they informed him. Hvoweiieifgy has not supportedtheAfsaseof and treated as hostile elicited in his cross-

examii.,na-ti'crl to':'5lJ'pyp0.r:t'v*-the-i case of the prosecution. 'Q47. Chennamma has been examined by . they pro5ec.u~ti_on, as she has seen the accused Nos.1 in the lorry. She has deposed that accused. No.3 was sitting in the cabin of the lorry and K accysed Nos.1, 2, 4 and 15 were sitting in the body the lorry and they were telling that they had Wrlnurdered Krishnegowda and they should go and cremate him and thereafterwards the lorry proceeded in the other direction. \::f> » _e38tt

48. Similarly, PW-41 Manchasetty has also been examined to show that he has seen accused Nos.1 to 4 and 15 were travelling inythe..__'__io';j_tyi shouting that they had killed Krishney"g--gwi»ti:alliand,"

others. However, this case of the prosecution Va-n_d treated as-"hoVstlile':'3 nothing has been elicited cross-e'xa':mination to support the case of evide:'nce_ accused Nos.1, 2, 4 and

15. Accéused the cabin of the lorry and the._§accvsed 4 and 15 were in the body of :'t:i*.¢=..l':Vlo_rr:y.A_.4'ﬂ'r"i=2e'y were uttering loudly "koie kole" and 'w"e'_re'~i;te'iling that they had committed the mLi'rzie'rﬁ " of Krishnegowda, Siddegowda and . .tv'ij'ayen'dra and they were holding the swords in their . lnatnds and the lorry went towards Beriya village.

50. PW-43 Vedavathi is the sister of accused Nos.3 and 4 and she has been examined to prove K52?» 140"

examination over the dead body of Vijayendra between 4.25 p.m. to 5.00 p.m. on 18.11.1995 at Primary Health Unit, Mirle Village, and hasvViss~:;ed the postmortem report as per Exhibit P-33-§a.'I[°:.t.;l_:' deposed about the external and inte.rjja.:Viéjjjur-aesrf found the dead body of Vija\,'tend:raj*, that the death was caused d"ue'to shock, as a result of i_njuVries:s'ustained to neck, shoulder, arms."':aggg.§.aind'back.of chest. He has also deposed in 15.12.1995, the police along with the broken and five blood stained has furnished his opinion as,.§§erin.Exhibi't_,Vl5--3$: that the injuries found on the dead Vijayendra were caused by the said ...;.ap.....~...

vsa.*"pw--45 Dr.Geetha Muralidhar working as Lady l\"/ledical Officer at Channarayapatna General ti-lopsital, has been examined to prove that Exhibits "V15-20 and P-21 (prescriptions) are issued by her and she has stated that the said prescriptions were issued to the patients who were treated as _41m outpatients and the said prescriptions are issued in respect of Rangegowda and Thimmegowda. Iteis the case of the prosecution that the accused treatment in Chennarayapatna General"A«'.|5iosp,it'a'l the fictitious name. e A , _ "V ._ V

54. PW-47 Ramesh was wgorkiing. a.s"*Assi5_tant ﬁngineer in P.W.D. K. R.Na'g-a__r Suhbivision ali:

request of the Investigatinoﬁffiwcerii (prepared the sketch ExhibitP._;'j«¢'.-:_£ 'ipe§_'tai'nin.g«to the scene of offence in this.case._... ' Bijirdiiijayiiaiiaykshmi working as a Medical VV(')'fficerV.i'.n[jV' Health Centre, Yelwal and shehas s4p'[email protected]'aho.ut the medical examination of ga':l.:':(@.-esidde gm; (accused No.1) on 24.11.1995. that she noticed four injuries which were in nature on the body of accused No.1 and the said injuries were six to seven days old and V."i~.)ente'red the details of the case in the M.L.C. Register she also examined Manju (accused No.2), Jayaram (accused No.3), Ramesh (accused No.4), "Z _42a and Manja @ Manju (accused No.15), who were also injured and she has issued the wound certifica_jtes~..as per Exhibits P~--43 to P-47 and has stated§V.:éaboiijttithe', nature of injuries sustained by..t.h_e accuseidgnrosi.1 to"

4 and 15.

56. PW-49 'ﬂpihotigographer who took the phovttizgiiraijitiyg-33.1."nf"'t'h.e'dead bodies of Krishnegowda; $iddeg'ot5[di3' Aa:'n_d.'..Viga'yendra and has deposed ifyeyiiidiehce and he has produ_cedV_t'he' Exhibits P-48 to P- 64 ahd the said photographs are producedgjs _pe'r_ VP---48(a) to P-64(a). A -,:P~W-50 Drffhejaprabha working as a Lady in Saligrarna. She conducted the post moi*tei'h "examination on the dead body of Siddegowda on 18.11.1995 between 4.30 p.m. to p.m. and according to her, the cause of death is 4' wdue to shock and haemorrhage, injury to skull bone and brain and brain vessels. She has produced the Post Mortem Examination Register as per Exhibit P- ex -43- 65 containing the relevant entries and her signature in this regard is marked as Exhibit P-65(a) andghas also issued an opinion after seeing the.'..'we'c-ipoiﬁrs marked as M.Os.5 to 7 and noticed on the dead body of Siddegowda "could befc:aused«' these weapons.

58. PW-51 Dr.K.S.Mu.rthy"-was' wags':-?igixn_gVV .;-?:s'ba.:if Senior Specialist in Dist_r4ict.:_ Geneiraipil-Iosipital in K.R.Nagar and on heijars conducted the post mortema.examii1a.tion*--on"«.t_he'i;7d.ead body of Krishn_eg--ow.da'.'i3etuieie:n"*..4.3O p.m. to 6.00 p.m. He has depos_eld_thatnitheﬂgaxternal and internal injuries _ areEl:isustainedlbyppAikrishnegowda and has further »As;t«ated,;: 'A«ti1aVt~-.__the death was due to shock and a result of multiple deep cut injuries to uubr.a"iVn,"head neck and to extremities (arms and it teas'). till-ie has produced the Post Mmortem Register Exhibit P-69 containing the relevant entries it "hand his signature in this regard is marked as Exhibit P-69(a). Further, he has given his opinion as per Exhibit P-72 regarding the injuries found on the ~<s _44_ body of deceased Krishnegowda and has stated that the external injuries No.2 to 11 and 13 could be caused by sharp edged weapons and injujry:.f"--hl'o.._'1 might be caused by falling on the roughliord by a blunt weapon and injury .No..12 1' by falling on a hard surface and the"

caused by any of the weapons found "to He has also examined V,-\.'VVi:sg'hw»aAnath"~(P\A.E-2) the inju red eye-witness', hdwih-pv V v.»'5AV:u's.tained simple injuries. The::':.gle\(a'nt Register are markedias copy of the sameiaiﬂs $5-89(a).

595 = PW-:51'3Z.S~;.Dew'aiah was working as P.S.I. in Y_elwala' and escorted accused Nos.1 to 4 togtheihéoyernment Hospital to collect the biood of the said accused and has deposed accgéordisigljyin his evidence. it 60. PW-53 B.M.MaIlesha was working as _y_A§ssistant Sub Inspector in Saligrama P.S. received the complaint of Govindegowda 'sent by V?

m45m Investigating Officer through P.C.4-70 as per Exhibit P2 and registered the same in Crime No.223--/"-1995 and prepared the F.I.R. as per handed over further investigation to"'«'.__th.e~~.:'Police Inspector. 1 .y ~ .

61. PW-54 M.A.Ramaraj is'_"cthe'ii»driver"of.._the lorry bearing No.KA-10-135.5, which sbeviangeassttaa hiss"

sister Vedavathi (PW~43)._m'»v.!fiovvev'er,.ivhejihas not supported the case ofV:the~.pi{ose'cut.igonand treated as hostile and no-thing."'ha~s"A in his cross- exaini._na--tion 'tufsjupp'0r:t"--the' case of the prosecution.

62. = PW:-5'5jV'Ja'var'eg'owda is a panch witness to maha,zar seizu.re": of clothes (Exhibit-76) of Vi'sh"wa'narth produced by his wife. However, he has the case of the prosecution and not__hEng~h"a.--siVbeen elicited in his cross-examination to suppiort the case of the prosecution.

63. PW-60 M.C.Lokesh is running a plaining and he has spoken to about his running of the \_,%f;

_45W Mill. According to the prosecution, accused Nos.1 and 2 got their weapons and swords sharpened in the Mill belonging to PW--60. However, he;~.ha_s'-..not supported the case of the prosecution hostile and nothing has beenm,e_licit_e'd"'in7j:!1'i's» VcrosV§;.'r.g4V"'--.. examination to support the case ;jof..~i*he».prosecui:§o'n;

64. PW--61 f'.S.Raj_ui":-w'as_» mlq;.5g las P.S.I. Konanur and he "~-Kééyanur Government Hospital and r.ecorjded_,;:___the:ifstatement of m.A.Ramar::j.;il[ri,,(m,54; jj,*vp'eVr""E=.xhibit P-74 and registered the'j¢.ase'iin.:_Cri'r'rie No.143 / 1995. 'V65. ,M.G.Narayan, President of Mirle ' GraVrn.a'Pan'<:hayath was examined by the prosecution lfvtvhat there was enemity between Kri"shrieg.owda his supporters Vijayendra and it Siddegowda and the accused. PW-62 continued to the President of Grama Panchayath though his "Midterm of office as President of the Panchayath had expired. However, PW-62 has not supported the case of the prosecution and treated as hostile and La/5 "E _47a nothing has been elicited in his cross-examination to support the case of the prosecution.

66. PW-63 H.K.Ramaiah who was _ Police Constable at Konanur police carr§ed::.t:h-e: «. in Crime No. 2 1 6/ 1 995 registered Konnéainu r = go Saligrama P.S accordingfto the.V_'letter""o'f:

Inspector as per ExhibitiVi4i"'V!T-if-8_3 spoken accordingly in his e'\r.i_djenc~e. at " ' working as P.S.I. in K.Rz.NagaVr and he has conducted a partof the Vi'n'uesti'gat'i'on in this case and similarly ""aw.Pvtiiisg-l.M;ai.9.utraiahg working as C.P.I. at K.R.Nagar ' _ Pol. ice: s;atlie_ni.1 ..

" "éw-70 A.R.Krishnaswamy was working as of Mysore Rural Sub-Division and has

--' icoindjucted a part of the investigation and his T "evidence has been eluded to while narrating the facts of the case. _ W M} M43"

69. PW-71 Dr.S.Chaithanya who was working as Lady Medical Officer at Konnanur has.g""hgeen examined to prove Exhibit P-74 treatment given to M.A.Ramaraju (PW-.54"). L'

70. PW--72 Dr.N.Shivartidra'swam-y~whgwowigiwas working as Senior Specialist"in"=.K.R.glel--ospi'Eal'Z examined the blood sampiesiof accuised-I to 4 and 15 as per Exhibits he has deposed accordingly is a panch witness to Exhibit. i mahazar of chopper) regardingia"th_e~reco>verv of sword. However, he has noltksuppoxrtedi"the case of the prosecution and ho_'§:stiie and nothing has been elicited in hisggiilcrossﬁeiiamination to support the case of the prose';-e:VI__.a'1=tion.

72. PW--74 Shankaraswamy was working as a .___F?'oiice ConstabEe?of Saligrama Police Station and he carried the corl1plaint to PW-53 (B.M.I\/tallesha, P.S.I.) from the spot to the Saligrama Police Station xﬁf ?

W49".

for registration of the same as per the instructions of the Investigating Officer.

73. pw-75 Mahesha, too:__<;'_f"' i _ (Vishwanath), who was injured to i:=..i_ r;:..,s,;f:tayn Mirie.

74. It is seen from-.__the alpove adduced by the prosecution"'that,_the"prosecution has reiied upon the evidence ey.e*~ieye'w_itnesses P.Ws.1 to 6, 9 and .10. j'~ho-stilleidvvit-nesses who are p.ws;3,"i1'eu:iz§g 3'i.i==;j,"i3?~,t.f;c: 39,41, 43, 54, 55, so and 52 have of the prosecution. The prosecutio~nV_"i1as: a=l_so'° relied upon the evidence of office'rs"¥5'.Ws.44, 46, 48, 50, 51,57, 71 and officers P.ws.52, 53. 58, 59, 63 to '7o_rand. '::The prosecution has also relied upon the motive? for the homicidal death of Krishnegowda, Sidjlctegowda and Vijayendera and the evidence of M eye witnesses and recovery made on the basis of the voluntary statement given by the accused to bring home the guilt of the accused. P.Ws.1 to 6, 9 and 10 are the eye witnesses to the incident. \%/3/g W50-

75. P.W.1-M.B.Srinivas is the brother-in-law of Krishnegowcla(deceased) and he has deposed in his examination--in-chief that he knows theV.ta'ccu.sed persons. The door of his house is fac_i.:§_:Ag.j'th'e'~«.ro'ad,v» which runs from east to west and that'rciad°is'called\ . as Hampapura-Saligrama ro4ad,"'r..:'"has"Vfurth_er deposed that he knew t:h'e__hoVu'se' of h',iisA~.aibvr.other-bin.-iL' law-Krishnegowda, which_i:"is --s_ituate«d:v'_be§(ond the house of He knew Vijayendra, .wsiddegovw[c:fa'~__'and*_ also P.W..2- Vish:'y_vanath';"iv.A_mong::t'h.e'm, only Vishwanath is alive. Krishne~g_owda',_ and Siddegowda were mL_irde.red. ~ ibrother-in-law-M.S.Krishnegowda irnburrdered at a distance of about 100 Ft. away Siddegowda was murdered at a di"stanc.e"of about 10 Ft. from the place where his 'olarothver-in-law Krishnegowda was murdered. 7:\iij'ayendra was murdered at a distance of about 25 it "to 30 ft. away from the place where Siddegowda was found murdered. There is a channel on Hampapura- Saligrama Road. A culvert is there and the vehicles V9/3 a51W are piying on it. His brother-in-law was a member of Congress-I during that period and he wasan Ex- President of Taluk Board and member.....ofV.':iviiysvore District Zilla Panchayath also.

Siddegowda and six other:'smVwere'._ T. I(rishnegowda(deceased)._ There .. wasgtgfag .'p'ancha'y.athg election in the village the year. During that period, one N:a~raya'n'ago'wi;ia._wastheJV4President of the Panchayath. the President of the Pang:h'aA.y:ath Dal. There were altogether . in the panchayath eiec':_ion.- VVf'Sii;<_vf'ilcanfcii-dates were elected. Before Narayan__agowd_a"assiimed charge as the President of "panchayath, was stipulated that he should ":r.enaaiin. iri"--the post of President for a period of one " ._ "'e§3rV"an_'d__ hisnext successor wiil remain in the office for anperiod of two years. On that understanding, it * Naraiyanagowda had assllmed charge of the post of PA'-:P'r'esident of the Panchayath. On completion of his "tenure as the President of the Panchayath, Narayanagowda did not step down. During that period, all the accused persons in this case were vii -52- supporters of Janada Dal. Even though the tenure of Narayanagowda as the President of Mirle Panchayath for a period of one year was oveeﬁghe did not step down as agreed by him ear|i:er..,'_y'f(.$nJthe other hand, he took the support..Io~f.V'sixi._more7.._ Congress-I candidates and gn1anag~ed__ t*o'c:Ont.i_,n'u,eg':'in V the post of President. l9!.a_inly,"*h.e'~sought.the support.' of his brother-in»-law Kriisihnegowda' to 'remain in power and during time t«eVriuj-Jet,jigfgviwarayainagowda, he was supporting in ail aspects.

When be the President witI*e__th_e Congress-I members, the picketing to A4 and A15 were having grouse against Krishnegowda and his Siddegowda and Vijayendra since remained in power with their a's'sis'tanc';e. Vijayendra and Siddegowda were strong * supporters of Krishnegowda. After Narayanagowda "continued to be the President of Mirle Panchayath "iwith the able assistance of Congress-I members, A1 to A4 and A15 were not getting any support from Narayanagowda, as they were getting it from him _53_ earlier. He has further deposed that on 16.11.1995, he came to know that a quarrel had taken place on 15.11.1995 between Kali @ siddegowda(A1)fahdhis brother Manja(A2) and Siddegowda(de.ceased')'"

Vijayendra(deceased) regavrdingg kerosene. On 18.11.1995 when:'.hle:Vwas..'pAin with his wife and chiidreii-v,..p;<i-is-;hnegewde"cahie to'? his house and on enciuirii:sg*,.h_:e'ca_;.11e toknow that he had been to Shan'l<ar'ahan*da4.::féi_ce.v"'Mill for hulling paddy. He.Vhéid.__gi\ﬁf'e'n;i for hulling. Shankara'na}ndA'a- "*ig_s::._atV_ distance of more house. His brother-in-law came motor bike Kinetic honda.

Kri.shnegowda.V:was in his house for a period of 10 .1 :Vini_nu_tes.*..,:'1~l.e asked him to join for lunch with them that he would come in the afternoon. He" a 'cup of tea in his house and then proceeded i"to-.._his"'house saying that he would come later. After minutes he left his house, he received a phone it "call intimating that preparations are going on to murder his brother-in-law and the person who had telephoned up had also intimated the names of the '~95?

__55_ college holding draggers. After the arrival of his brother-in-law, he informed him about the 'pseudo phone message received by him. Then,_;h'is..'b'r_othvewr- in--law-Krishnegowda gave his mo.toi=.yV'cyclei"to Sujayakumar and asked him tioégigseiccgure" ' and Siddegowda and gave instructionsrtyoiget}some weapons while returningfviviifromyyth'e'ir:_Vse'lf protection. He asked his brother-in--§l.a'g.v"to_w».g'et_insideﬂthe house and he went face and was about t.he:n':,'V.'Sujiayakumar brought the motor bike and they} one chopper with them.

ThereaftLer,Vv' atA::""!.."brother--in--iaw, Vijayendra, Sigddegowd'a'~ Vishwanath proceeded towards the brother-in-law and he followed them. ~. AVMohan'(v_v9.iAI;§)was also accompanying his brother-in- law."--V:Su§ayakumar(P.W.6) remained at a distance. A " an the way, they came across Govindegowda and lshjakunthalamma. By then, they saw A1 to A4 and A15 coming from the culvert side holding choppers. They were followed by some persons also. Those persons were found following A1 to A4 and A15 from xvsaéé' , -57- .9.

:1.

fell down with his face upwards. Thereafter, once again A1 to A4 and A15 assaulted choppers. By then, Krishnegowda camewthere.;' was found wielding chopper at Kali arid '5t"he'n, chopper had broken into pieces arid' that..ti*m:e, the accused Jayaram('A3..)_ dealt a chopper on the back head of Krishnegowda. As"'--ai"resV.qlﬁ,' :Vl1ll<"ras_5ﬁeggowda fell down with his face.'downwa:rds.V ialll the remaining accused_A ral blows with the On seeing the same, came there and asked the accused are assaulting Krishnegowda agntl udauring"-that tirne, A15 wanted to deal a blow on face he wielded the chopper and Vishwanath ._ of averting that blow, put forth his left ha'nq.-._'§;.n'd'V' consequently, he received the blow on the * left palm. Immediately, Vishwanath turned back and ﬂwanted to run away from that spot and during that "time, A1--Kali dealt a blow with a chopper on his back. Vishwanath ran a distance of about 150 ft. after receiving that blow and fell down on a lane Uifé _53_ passing by the side of the house of Siddegowda situated just opposite to his house. the incident took place, he was at a distance-fof'._'__a!:;o'ut 50ft. away from 'the assailants. Since.j\_j1.VVto.::'A.4 A15 were armed with chopp:ers:_:,he_ to the rescue of his brothe'r.-4_in--law."- Thereafter, A4 and A15 proceeded soniendistance"_ironi:'there and A2 came back and found out whether not. He also ascertained re-iinaining two were alive or tvouiched his finger to the blood "~-Krishnegowda and also tasted it andiialso went back shouting that ifyaniybodyV'is.._.dare:enough could come and while so

2.':g.oingi,;A._h'e'-~.,was found brandishing the chopper. he came back to his house and tried to co'nta-ct""§aligrama' Police. He could not get " connection. By the time, he could contact the police, police had been already informed by someone. "iThe police came to the spot around 1.30 P.M. The incident took place between 12.15 noon and 12.30. Then, he informed about the incident to his sister W2 W59"

over phone. He has further deposed about the police examining the place and collecting sample nraud and also blood stained mud from the spot§...._a'i3o_ut;'pt'he injuries sustained by his brother-in-law.'rﬁiclciegowdavl and Vijayendra as per the ir_rq'L;e"st~i'pa:r:cha'na_rna it Ex.P1. He has further dpeposeidthat all.."tthe now produced before 'tioulrti to be identical and thereifore,_"idtmVjgV:--:gjhlf"-possible"tor him to say which among accused. Nos.1 to 4 and elapsed, it is not possible€'.'ouut}the katti, which was in possession'"Yof_vii"ihiso"'brother-in--law(Krishnegowda). Howe\}'er,ilheV"'ha's the knicker and banian nby hisvlibrother-in-law Krishnegowda as per which were blood stained.

'~lif?'.'i.J'\l.2-Vishwanath is an injured eu9'ew--itn'e"ss. He has deposed in his examination--in- V " ch_iefv'that he knows all the accused in this case from childhood and that he knew Siddegowda, "lKrishnegowda and Vijayendra(deceased). He has stated that they are all murdered. Krishnegowda belonged to Congress-I party. Vijaye-ndra and ".35"

11601..

Siddegowda were his followers. The accused belonged to Janataclal party. He also deposed that Narayanagowcla(P.W.62) was the President of Mandal Panchayath and he was elected as"Jta«n"ata.dal Candidate. In-that election, nine Janatadal and '6 candidates-Ifrom got elected. Narayanagowdia_w.asl the..',ACh,airiri'a.n'l'of the Mandal Panchayath'-iforp, a .pe_riedlj_of~--.Vo'n'e"jyear.' After his tenure was A..lo've'_r, "Che defected to the Congress-I party and,'co'nt§ir§ueci'V..toLbe the Chairman of the Mandal help of Congress-

I were members of Janatadal party. lSfter"'--Naras/tandlacgowda became the Chairman ofgthe. Mirlellllialndal Panchayath for the second term 'Vwithathe4vA'a.ssistance of the Congress-I members, he u"ﬂ\}'.irttial'l_yv.__ dstopped giving contract works of the phancvhayath to the accused persons. Even earlier to * f;h''atl''l:here were cases between Krishnegowda and C"-:a'c'cused. He has further deposed that on 18.11.1995 "at about 8 or 9 a.m., he had been to his lands situated behind Junior College, Mirle. Around 11 or 11.15 a.m., he was returning home from his lands as t.:"é3/§ s51_ he had developed headache. One Mohan and Deepu were following him, while he was so returning home. Mohan and Deepu who were coming from hi.sV'iaeh,ind, pat his back and when he turned accused Jayaram and Kali(A3 Mohan and Deepu from their beh~ind...:4..,'They,___we':'1e armed with sickles. They -had ilnotorii» bike. Both Mohan and told" accused Kali and Jayaramarfe Hletold them that he would_enqLri,re,:'thehmV3 on seeing him, and A3)went back on their m'ot"or~._hike,.,i_':'*-fhereafter, himself, Deepu and Mohan' road, which leads to main road; r..Whe'n.,,_V_VVthey: reached the main road, he saw «Krishr.eg.owda coming from rice mill side in his Krishnegowda asked them to come near thehouse of his brother-in-law Srinivasa. The nh.o_'use"' of Srinivasa is situated by the side of main Himself, Mohan (P.W.5) went near the house """of Srinivasa. Deepu went back. He told Krishnegowda that the accused Kali and Jayaram were found chasing Mohan and Deepu near the '£35:

~62."

Junior College at Mirle. Krishnegowda enquired with Mohan also. He also disclosed that the acc.us»e_d..Vi<ali and Jayaram being armed with Om near the Junior college and chased they went near the house of Srinivasa, Sriilaivasa was 'aiso found there. TBy___V 'that V Sujayakumar(P.W.6) _and told Krishnegowda that«.._l!;1' being armed with Om sickles are in search of Thereafter, Krishnegow'c!a;::pv_ wkinetic I honda to him to get Vijayendra and Siddegowda' Sujayakumar to get sogfnett.kind"weapon for their self protection. Sujayakumar went in the Kinetic I-Ionda Srinivasa(P.W. 1) told Krishvnegowda(deceased) that he had received a rag:-seudo phone call saying that some one would ""._ﬁmL'irder Krishnegowda and that before he could "ascertain the name and address of the person who made the phone call, the person who made the calf had kept the receiver without disclosing his identity. {IQ/3%

-64."

from bank side. They were proceeding on the main road, in order to go to the house of Krishnegowda. While, they were so going on the main A4 and A15 were coming fr_om__Chaiﬁariajaltthannei'IV. side. While they were so goi_ng;"on and A15 coming "'ooposi't§Aifv«d.ir¢;3ction.,:A' Krishnegowda instyructedy.__tuhe_m».Knot.ltoiagssault them saying that they dovi'.a"nVyt:hing and they may simply pass them after they went near the A1 to A4 and A15 channel side. They were On seeing the same, Vijavéﬁdjra to A4 came forward and A3§f3'ayaran*ia..V_assanlted Vijayendra with Om Katti on immediately Vijayendra fell down. ._Iirn_Vmedi_ateVl:y,""A4-Ramesh, A2 dealt 7 or 8 blows with their =--sici<"E'es on Vijayendra. on seeking the same, A. nssiddevgowda rushed there. Immediately A-1 dealt a with a sickle on the neck of Siddegowda A V' "followed by A-15 with Om katti. They had dealt 3 or 4 blows on Siddegowda on his face and neck. On seeing the same Krishnegowda rushed there and he mg» 1/'

-65..

} wielded a chopper té assault Manja--A2 on his legs. During that time, A-3 came from behind and assaulted him with a sickle on his*--v,.f",h:ea'd. Immediately, A1, A15, A4 and A3 dealt V15,' blows with their sickles on.-A'Kr«is,hn'eoow:--d'aQ"

result, Krishnegowda fell down seeing the same, he "to, "tivéscule of' Krishnegowda. Imihediateily, 'A_1..5.'wi'e!ded a katti which he had process of avoiding left hand, _as a result, During that time} A1 with a katti on his waist.

Being 'fi<.i,<:_,1htvena=é::ci:,.VAlie:iifanﬁsaway from the spot towards thefhouse t:f,_dB'a|aVi'amegowda. He asked for some «wa'te_i.{,. had lost his consciousness. when he ._re.g%ai"iie';!.__consciousness, he found Ningegowda and Mia-hes:hav"'by his side along with police. The doses? alreacly treated him for his injuries. It was '"'._a"ro"und 4.30 PM. The incident in question took place " "around 12 noon. He regained consciousness around 4 or 4.30 P.M. and he was in a fit condition to speak. He narrated the entire incident to the police we s55_ Inspector, who recorded the same. He was referred to major hospitai and was treated at K.R.Ho'sp'Et'aI, Mysore. He was inpatient for 10 or 12 identified the weapons used __by.the the ' 9. blood stained shirt and knicker He has also identified M'.o;5,_ which w..cs:...ta.e hands of Siddegowda. .RestVA...oVff.theAm hiwereffound in possession of the not possible for him to say which was found to be in accused and he the broken sickle was if-.Ou«.n'd . V = 0 'V77. F5'.i:*J.3jf§irJvindegowda is the complainant .' _thi,s'cas:e'-.and he has deposed in his examination- it'i§§...chi'eiA."."t.h'a.titKrishnegowda was his father-in-law. third "daughter was given in marriage to him. used to visit Mirle village to get agricultural iffalaiourers for doing work in his tands. He was also 9' "Mirle Mandal Panchayath member prior to 1993. He has further deposed that on 18.11.1995 around 10.45 or 11.00 a.m. he went to his lands at \S"§' u,67_ Mirle. From there, he came to the Convent to pick his children, by that time, his children haédgiajjregady gone to the house of his father--in--law. so coming, he came to know that one'KaI,i'('A1) Manja(A2), Jayarama and Ftame'sh:(l¥3_h'a'n'd"}!£:4.)é A15 were preparing themseiv-es fon€:'doi.nVgV ..3som-ed' Qalata. On coming to went to his father--in-law's" _ found that Krishnegowda wasin-ct. Vm:ot.her--in--Iaw was found she had also receiyendi ~..a $M.B.Srinivas(P.W.1)-- broth_erei'n;liaVw~toil'"l€ri'shn'egowda saying that the accused--l:_'we_re" Zmakiiinigméoreparations to commit the murder of hisiivfather-in-law and they were moving :hclldi_ng.the-,weapons and told him that his father--in- .ia'iw'had/."_Q_Oii?éV..to rice mill and asked him to bring him safely--V:«to"'.the house. He drank some water in his ' ".father¥¥in-law's house and tried to contact the police phone, but he could not contact them. it ""'l'hereafter, he went towards the rice mill to get his father--in--law home. He went through a bridge put across the culvert and passed through and F 23.

\\'/(/5 _'72m

78. P.W.4---I-i.D.Shankuntala has deposed in her examination-in-chief that she knows the accused since last 25 years(witness examined on 11.8V.;':..998). She was a member of Mirle grama pancha'yta'th.c..V"'IVn the year 1994, Narayanagowda( .

Chairman of Mirle grama :pa'n'c4hayyath\_:*'.I,.ﬂ<'ﬂ¢..i'a~ha'dt contested the grama pancha__y*ath e'lecti»on member of Janatha Dal oa--r:ty.yandV'withV..thexsti'b'port of Janatha Dal he was el.ected' bias' Chairmraén. The elected members to J|V_E'i'rl'c--:..vjﬁiramafﬁaachayath were six from 'Congfressa, and nine from Janata Dal and oné-_fro,mx' Narayanagowda was elected frc«s§1.1'Vl'the V"othe__r___.reserved candidates with an » rJnderstan,d'in__g that he shall remain in office for one 'y:ea.r Vyfxtvhereafter shall vacate the office vol4izI}t"aéVri.ly. But, Narayanagowda did not vacate his offircewwafter one year as promised by him. In this Zijetgard, Janatha Dal leaders had held an office if wmeeting and advised Narayanagowda to vacate the office. Narayanagowda did not agree for the decision of the arbitrator. But, he approached W5 __'73u1 Krishnegowda, who was then a congress leader in the village. During 1994, Krishnegowda;'was'-~.the Taluka Congress President and Parishad. Narayanagowda _sQu_ght » _ Krishnegowda and other Congress» constituency and as directed iKrish.ne;g'ow.d~a, six' grama panchayath, memsb;,,;s gaste' votes in favour of support him.

Therefore, of grama panchaya_th:.4s on behalf of Janata__ls3:a'l,.Va'j:~,--'gV%¢";:_: Janata Dal and they werésaisoAdo«'i.ng:i:soni.e:'work namely, getting loan and contratt ,work".* isAifteriiiiarayanagowda taking support fro,;.-5111*' C.ongres_s:vinernbers, he stopped helping A1 to _s;i"ih.e.refore, A1 to A5 had a vengeance against He has further deposed that on 1S".'-11=..'::l..9'9"'S, kerosene oil was distributed in their

-:ti!lage"i:onsumer's Society. At that time, there was "".ga'ia'ta between A1 to A5 and the supporters of '"l(rishnegowda, namely, Vijayendra and Siddegowda. There was clash between A1 to A5 on the one hand and Vijayendra and Siddegowda on the other hand. U1 3 m74W In this regard, a case was registered in Saligrama police station against both parties. On 16.1.1"'.----:t995, Vijayendra and Krishnegowda were retu.r_n'i.n:g4,:4'from Saligrama town in a car. During that and A5 spit on Vijayendra ranidi"Krishz1eg'oyi,*da:ia'n.d 7 therefore, they had chased theniyand ray away towards Chunchaﬁh'katte."' deposed that on peopiexi amongst accused went to it it-he Krishnegowda soiiciting a« but,'--i_'I(ris:hnegowda did not agree ihfasi';fu'rther deposed that on noon, she was proceeding towardsgbus stand way to attend shandy. She to reaichftausii stand from her house via bank 'roiad;i:Afi'he._Vbank road joins the main road of Mirle. ._'¥'ih_eA ieads to Saligrama on one side and on the otvherhside leads to K.R.Nagara. She was waiting is i;1__the" iaus stand. Then, she came to knew that some W:ga'Iata was going on near the house of "Puttaswamygowda and out of curiosity, she went near the house of Puttaswamygowda and stood near the house of one Venkatesh to watch galata. At a U23 :75- distance of 2 to 3 furlongs from the place where she was standing, she saw a group of people. Shecould identify the members of the group. A1 to from the same group armed with om_ that' time, Krishneéowda, VijajJren:d4erVa",«_gg Srinivasa, Udayakumar, _4MohéanaV- were coming from the of She saw Govindegowda'~com'iVn'g: of State Bank Road. A with a chopper. devarakatti.

The distance" Pvuttaswamygowda from the place ygﬁg-.,._5ta-hding was about 50 feet. Vijayendrar V wen: . from the group of Kri_s'ﬁnegowda.:V'At:that time, A3 came from their grxoupiiitowavrds Krishnegowda and beat him on his chopper and Vijayendra fell down su"stai.'n.irug: injuries. A2 and A4 assaulted Vijayendra V. ~w.i_th om kattié; who had fallen on the ground. "'w.Si'ddegowda went to the rescue of Vijayendra A V' "holding Devarakatti. A1 hit him on his neck with Omkatti. Then Siddegowda kneeled back to avoid the blow. Then A2 to A5 assaulted Siddegowda with 2;';/Q. __'76__ Omkattis. Siddegowda fell on the ground. A1 to A5 assauited him on his waist, hands, back and aiisover the body. Then Krishnegowda went to Siddegowda with chopper in his hand..,'V_'4_:H.¢' the chopper towards £2, the it ground and broken into_pi_eces'.'--_ikrishneigoiwdaiiwent'up to pick up the chopper, "him on his head with Omkatti. itrishnegowda fell on the ground. four accused assauited and might have deait Krisihﬁnegowda. Vishwanath went to -the-".rescu»eKoiF..Krishnegowda. A5 lifted his omkattiato Vishwanath raised hisgipaim to A.aj::o'id the blow and sustained injury to Then A1 hit on the waist of with the weapon. Vishwanath ran the scene. A1 to A5 checked by shaking "the hbody of Krishnegowda, Siddegowda and "'V.:\'Ii}"ayendra, if they were aiive and found that they; "were dead. A1 to A5 raising their hands gave challenge to the peopie gathered there stating that whoever wants to come and see wouid face the X i'?

gzgxs 8' M'7'7M same consequence. A1 to A5 then proceeded towards channel. Out of them, A2 came back and shaked the body of Krishnegowda and |ick_:fed'~».the blood oozing out from the body of from his hands and went away... T_!fhen'a" . _ iorry and went away. A1. to A5 £:_hrewii»th'e:i'r towards channel while proceeding towa'rc§l_s4-v-channei.,.i' She did not raise a§arm the oc'currerice of the incident under the "fear of 1 to 5. Then she went hwle the house of famiiy members had :¥fea_rntVVa5'3o_iut >t'he'.vvi.nci-dent. Again, they went to the sceneot she has identified M.0.6 asjthe. weapon. which was in the hands of A5 and weapon found in the hands of The broken chopper as the weapon fo"und':i.n"t'he hands of Krishnegowda, as per M.0.7. " P.W.5-M.L.Mohana has deposed in his V"-"_'e)tamination-in---chief that he knew the accused, __5Krishnegowda, Siddegowda, and Vijayendra. He knew Govindegowda(P.W.1) and P.Ws.2 to 4. At the e t A 13.3 iwvaw time of incident, he was studying in II year PUC in Junior Coliege at Mirle. On 18.11.1995, himself and his friend-Deepu were talking to each otherjstanding outside their college. At that time, coming on a motor bike armedwwith » L' them and being scared they Irare'_'_'behir:d"'the:uooilyege. A1 and A3 started to theym _aitdl'§t'itey"lwered running. At that time,:,\I:iVshwa.nathh""wasireturning from his lands front of them.

Vishwanath _:en__quir'ed" ' reason for their running itiolaii A1 and A3 were chas:'i_ng._ -they will assault them. On listening, them that he would engeiylitiire wit'h..V,,A1 and A3 and took them in front of 'co:liege_pre.mises. On seeing them, A1 and A3 went i byke towards bank. Then Vishwanath tookv'-.':the'm stating that he will inform it to rrlﬂrishnegowda. They came by SBM road and reached 3"-Saligrama and K.R.nagara main road. At that time, '"'iKrishnegowda came from the side of rice mill. Vishwanath informed Krishnegowda that A1 and A3 were threatening him and Deepu. when himseif and gé __'79__ Vishwanath were informing Krishnegowda, Deepu had gone away with fear. Afterwards, Krishnegowda went to the house of his brother-in-law his Kinetic Honda. Himself and Vishwanajth['foVI'4low'edVv' him. By the time they r:each'ed"<_,th'e- if Srinivasa, Krishnegowda _had4'vwashed hands by removing hisiiviuihgi andV_"sh-irtiiirand was relaxing. Krishneg':owda_«'ien'qui_red~.gvishwanath about the incident and at thatiftirhe,~..,:Srii'ni_v~as(P.W.1) told Krishnegovvda;_that=._ A1 -to were making preparat.ion;s"_,Rto"*- krishnegowda and his supginorte-rs'and::"are~..i_moving with Omkattis and aiso told .<..a;.,i.neg¢.....;.jgangsta: in this regard, he had regcgfeived a "phone call and advised Krishnegowda not outifrvom the house on that day. At that time, aiso came there.

Krishniegoiwda asked him to get Vijayendra and V. Siddegowda to the house of Srinivas. He told '.VS'ujayakumar to inform them that A1 to A5 are "making preparations to murder him and therefore, ask them to come with weapons for their defence. He lent his Kinetic Honda for that purpose. Sujaya I 5:

X/*~»-g/3.3.

('J m80_ Kumar went on Kinetic Honda and brought Siddegowda and Vijayendra. when theyvreiturned Siddegowda brought a Devarakatti and;v""V4ijVay:eli1_dra did not bring any weapon.

Siddegowda and Vijayendra that making propaganda in: the iiiiiage thv'ati't'he'yiiierijiity murder him and his jiiﬁrisiiinegowda advised others raisei.theyirjhandsagainst A1 to AS and a|so__to|d :';i:.'thg;."_'..;;ondition goes beyond H will see.

shall go to his house.

came out of the house of Sriniyasa. asked Srinivasa to park the veihitcze insideitihe house and also asked him to push panche, which was on the vehicle inside V've'hi_ci~e';'V.. Srinivasa went to park the vehicle. l{risli:.'neg'owda picked up chopper from his kinetic it * honda. They were proceeding towards the house of 'Krishnegowda and Sujayakumar was following them. Srinivasa stood at the house to park the scooter. At that time, A1 to A5 were coming from the side of bridge and they came near the house of E{' E \}rf.;(,> L) -31- Puttaswamygowda. At that time, Govindegowda, came from the side of SBM road and joined vth:e'»main road. Govindegowda was coming toward-sh_,'t.h_§hii,'to talk to Krishnegowda. But, he Krishnegowda. In the meéintime,. ' towards them and A3 all of a s'u_d'den wi-thdut anything assauited Vijaiyiiveﬁnidera an with Omkatti. siddegd§t«;da'_iAd.t,i§sh§;i,,_,,,t¢ they' resue of Vijayendra. fiihen Sidcfegowda with and again A2 to A5 assaulted'. Cimkatti. Siddegowda sucéa_._Im_bedV"ta_,:the"'~,iiii§-uI'ies. Krishnegowda went to the reds*::4_ueo'f white so going, he was arrgt1ed.with' chcipper and tried to hit on the leg of chopper felt to the ground and was ._i$ifttkért"_'iintiif"]5ieces. Krishnegowda had bent to hit A2 and atdtiiat time, A3 assaulted him on the back side A hams head with Omkatti. Following him, A1, A2 to assaulted Krishnegowda all over his body with "Omkattis. Vishwanath interfered and tried to prevent the accused. At that time, A5 tried to assault Vishwanath with Omkatti on his head, but, the blow ....82....

fell on the left palm of Vishwanath. A4 assaulted him on his waist. Vishwanath ran away withgfear. After assaulting Vishwanath, A1 to A5 channel side. After proceeding a lit_tVl_eV:"'dis'.fanceg' came back and checkgé.-JdAiVi::'"i~.*..V if Siddegowda and Vijayendra a're"'alive.,'..".l'1--le itocjli<."'th'e.V blood from the body of Kr:§Ijnegow§I:§~anciyyiiged the same to his face blood: He also threatened the people' to face him if amlbodv went towards the there was a lorry standingAand--«»._t:hey'~i_board'ed the lorry belonging to Ramraj(gl5.w'.5--4)"..andj.went away. He has identified the weaponslield by accused and Krishnegowda and life has identified M.0.5 as the ._E}'eyara'l;.atti;"which was in the hands of Siddegowda and as the Omkattis, which were in the hands be c.-f_Ai'" to A5 and M.O.7 as the pieces of the broken ""..Vc'hopper, which was in the hands of Krishnegowda.

"He has stated that he gave statement before the police on the day following the incident. _83_

80. P.W.6-Sujayakumar has deposed in his examination-in-chief that he knows the accusiéd and P.Ws.1 to 5. During the year 1995, tine member of Grama Panchayath.

Grama Panchayath took place it Narayanagowda was elected asthe of the elected candidates;s».3nine be~!o'ng;Veda'toVVVJanata Dal and six candiciates Congress party. Narayanagowda J:e.:,:jv"a:ta_ii__if9aI. There was an undersf'ca'rijg:i:ring Dal party that Narayana_go;w_d'a'ishoiiIjdV..ft:ncti»onas Chairman for one year':Vand-the':.:-«heshadftn give up the post to one Lathi Thukaram. Hrh¢'r.é;a.ri£ei§;i he did not go bye his words "did not -Leave iihis post. He continued to be the the support of the congress members. ri?i;'e'n1bers supported Narayanagowda under the iieakdership of Krishnegowda. Then is Krishvnegowda was the President of District Congress °-:C'o'mmittee and member of Zilla Panchayath. He was "also the President of Taluka Board. Vifayendra, Siddegowda and Vishwanath, Mohan were followers of Krishnegowda. The accused belonged to Janata _ ~84~w Dal party. The accused belonged to the block of Narayanagowda. They were carrying on some work under IRDP scheme Rozgar Yojane). gjihfter Narayanagowda secuﬁrig support of,...._£_fo'nn-g;'re'ss members, he stopped giving work The accused were pressurizingiiiNarayana:gowda_to give them work and in this rega.rd,._they»',w.é:re' galata with Narayanagow'd~a:,"'l.A1 to' 1.;-J'er'6;a: carrying out the work under'~.1_RD_f-"Imschenﬁe... Sinceifthe grant for the stayed work-1-'was; they stopped pressing fo.r"tyh:yir:' w<ork..§'The'"--az;cuVsed were making Qalati-3:? 0.3 15.11.1995, there was a galata'betwee'n one hand and Vijayendra anclsiddegowda on the other hand in respect of 1' released,'of'*--..kerosene of the society and a police co'r_n.pl'a:i'n,t__' lodged on both sides. He was inferm'ed'b:y some others about the said incident. On 18.11.1995 at about 11.00 AM. he heard some .1'-..pe.o..ple talklng bn the road that A1 to A5 were .._rnaking preparations to murder Krishnegowda and in this regard, they are getting ready with weapons. on hearing the same, he went to the house of we _35_ Krishnegowda with an_ intention to prevent him from coming out of his hcﬁise on that day. wh'.e~n, he reached the house of Krishnegowda, present in his house. By that time, R_aja"n1:.ma;~ Krishnegowda was infornliieciné T. Srinivasa(P.W.1) regarding th.;_."'--mattger:,..'g'V"Rajamman told him that Krish'ne:gowda"'..V_ to Shankarananda him to go there and escort came on SBM road to mill, but, in the in the courtyard of 3:__he._-hwoiasencrof-.:'Srinivas. Along with him, Mohan(--§.W.S'), srag;e;--;g(p.w.1), Vishwanath(P.W.2) wcgéreeiaiso "present. Krishnegowda called him and 'told secure Vijayendra and Siddegowda to the ._ hhouseiof__SVr'in.ivasa and he aiso lent his Kinetic Honda E to"sec:ore"'Vijayen:tira and Siddegowda. He proceeded *on_ road and reached near the house of "'V.VVVij'ayendera. Vijayendra and Siddegowda both were "present in the house of Vijayendra. He informed them the matter. Krishnegowda had also told him to inform Siddegowda and Vijayendera to bring \§1:5:5'=> €, _35_ weapons for their self defence. Siddegowda and Vijayendra both accompanied him to the house of Srinivas on the scooter. Siddegowda ﬂies devarakatti. They came on SBM them at Krishnegowda. K;r'ish'_nye_qo«wdAa T that they shall go to hiswhouseiand aiso.vad.yised'; that they should not raiushiz.-:Ve:._V'their algéaihst the group of the accusedo. Vti:1,_e.y;"raise§,VVthVey can use only reasonable protection.

Krishnegowdiey-h 'V . ~~ ..._..!i§iddegowda and Vishwanatﬁi':¢a_nd'"'S:ii"n.iVvasvi~start'ed to proceed to the house __o.t AVVVii('rishneg.o'w.da..' Krishnegowda took his choppieri ain'di'M§ohana stood at the house of Syn-?¢nivas(lV='.i.1!V,:V1)'. 'At that time, Govindegowda-son- Krishnegowda was hurriedly coming ii"'._i:'-A-'5._"r"ia"'av"<z:'l'._i-3,iV___:i§:i'i'shnegowda on SBM road to talk to K'"r-ishnegowda. But, he did not talk to suit;-islinegowda. A1 to A5 were coming from the A KVVo'p';5osite side of Krishnegowda and they were armed 'with Omkattis. When Vijayendra came in front of the house of Kendagannana Krishnegowda, A2 and A3 assaulted him on his neck with Omkatti and he fell to "éf«;3~«-;'> to...' I __8'7__ ground and died. Siddegowda came a step forward to rescue Vijayendra. Though he was armed with a katti, A1 to A5 surrounded him and atta4c.kedi._Vhim with Omkattis an over his body. He fe§_i"'do'wnV'i' died. Then A1 to A5 attacked-"i(rishneg<owd4a..»au'~--.x Krishnegowda attempted to I-avo_id'A.Ai'i.tﬁ...A'S"ijy.,__u:;§.:ig A his chopper, but, in thiis-prociess, down and broken into attacked Krishnegowda _ Krishnegowda received more than.w~f.i§_ew»bhawgs to the ground. Vishwanafh" . it iiirishnegowda. A5 atternptedgito--«v.aissa'u_it.yishwanath on his skuii, but, the biow hit of Vishwanath, who tried to_{a"vo.id theuvniay holding his hand. A1 assaulted A.A'~h_in10mkatti on his waist. Vishwanath ._ s'uVsitai:n_ei.d'bieeding injuries and ran away with fear. 15L-.rin':g' the incident, he was standing and watching is at' a distance of about 20 to 25 feet. Himseif, Srinivas '.a'nd Mohan stood back due to fear. Govindegowda, "ishakunthala and Nagamma and others were also present at the scene. A1 to A5 started to go towards nala side. A2 came back and checked if the three \ "'3 x \>'{-{ £9' a} _33m persons were breathing. He came near the body of Krishnegowda, took the oozing blood from his-_body and wiped it on his face and forehead same. Then all the accused went towa"rds'inal'a sid_e7--., by exhibiting their arms arr=diVsh'outi_ng'.-i.:_':"rhe:reVVVthe T I.orry of one Rajaraju was parked. and.:.tlhe'y the said lorry and went"'a:way.

M.0.5, as the weapon, inithévyé hands of Siddegowda and pieces of chopper, was Krishnegowcla.

M.O.6 th4"e_,..6'nakatt.is'."w_hi'§::;1"'were in the hands of

81." l=:5.lu'lI.'9-lvlahvgala w/o.Ganesh has deposed A her.exaniin'ation-in-chief that her house is 4o'VnV:'_Mirle Saligrama main road. On the left Aside of hyeriihouse, the house of Puttaswamygowda is AA situatiééd. To the right, the house of Srinivas is "situated. The main road is situated at a distance of Héabout 70 to 80 feet from her house. The distance between her house and the house of Puttaswamy is also about 50 feet. She has further deposed that on xk-§g%,§:_ __89__ a Saturday, she was inside her house. She was alone at her house aiong with her aged pare.n_ts:.i~.,_Her husband had been to iands and children.§h.ad5.b,eer2___toV school. At 12 noon, she heardsome"g-a1Eata'V:o'uVts,ide,:u'~~_V and came out. She saw S_rin_i'va:'s,7aKrAishne§;rov»:c'.sa, Vijayendra, Sujaykumar, Vii'-..§iddeg:owd.aqVV Vishwanath were going -the' ofvfihouse of Srinivas towards V vviihuttaswamygowda. Krishnegowdav chopper and Siddegowdia Then A1 to A4 and them armed with swo'r_ds.. .AiAfriction between two groups and and K1-ishnegowda died ingfthe struggilie. v::5he does not know the cause of In the galata, the chopper of S was broken. Siddegowda first succumbed to the injuries. Then Vijayendra died. on She saw Krishnegowda falling on the ground, but, '..Vs'I'1e did not see who attacked these three persons. "At this stage, public prosecutor has sought permission to treat the witness as hostiie and was permitted to be cross--examined by the public kg?/5&3 -99- prosecutor. It is elicited in her cross-examination by the Pubiic Prosecutor that she has stated h.efo44re.V_the police that when she came out, she and A15 assauiting Krishneggowda,Vijaygndrap Siddegowda with swords anti c_Vom:mliett'eAd"'-muirdéereof 1' those three persons. Eitis trluellto that galata, Vishwanath alls'o.:su.sta'in'ed_iiﬁnjufries. It is true that after back and touched the.vthree.-dehad 'confirmed that they were the blood of and smeared the same on his the blood and went away shoutirzg. Mohan was also with the g"rgoup.of Vl("riAs_hVnegV:owda. It is true that at that time, came from the bank road side. It is ._t§.'_l'.y=eV"'t:ll1_av_t_ neighbours of iocality were watching tlhe inicicient. It is true that except A1 to A4 and A15, there" were no other group near the scene of ".Voc"currence. It is true that A1 to A4 and A15 assaulted Vijayendra, Siddegowda and Krishnegowda with swords and murdered them. It is true that her earlier statement in chief- X'/Q'/gi;

__9]_W examination that she do not know the cause of death of Vi}'ayendera, Siddegowda and Krishnegowda, but she saw them only after their death is incorrect...'

82. P.W.10-Janaki has deposet5.VVV:'A--fi:I'i.. evidence that her house is 'situ.atAed"--.co'r1fi:§a'nic._road. The distance between heer.hous'e_Vand Musirle-.fS_Valig"j;ra'ma"A. road is about 50 feet. tlveriﬂhousef'hasfdoors facing towards South door of her house faces the Southern door of hesf: éhcruse;-thie".ho.us:e':'Vof'-S'rinivasa(P.W.1) is visible. ._ ThVef'~"e.£ivs:l:E:n'cvet"E2.etween her house and houses of if Krishnegowda and Puiattaswamvgiowdai is about 50 feet. About four ye'ars"'fb.a.ck,vone day on 17"' Saturday(the witness is o:n'V'.23f;.12.1998), she was in her house and he'ard'-.V:so:'he gafata from the side of Saligrama main it rAroad.V°'hShe came_ out and saw A1 to A4 and A15 "'..a'rn'1:ed with big suéords. She also saw Krishnegowda, "Vijayendra, Siddegowda, Vishwanath and Mohan there. A1 assaulted Vijayendra with the sword. Sustaining the blows, Vijayendra fell down. Then A1 __92__ and A2 assaulted Siddegowda with swords. Siddegowda also fell to the ground sustaining injuries. A1 to A3 then assaulted Krishnego'w'diafwith swords. A4 and A15 aiso assaulted"__Kr.ishn»egowidai' with swords. KrishnegowdaV';aiso«fell ttc.it'hetg'round A7 sustaining injuries. Vishwanathsusta'ined" in-.juri'esi on his hands and waist""a:n'd he 'ran- bank road. The neigiihbouirstihéa.gatheredtiiythere and they were watching and A2 then took the bi~oodpI'of wiped the same to theiri4che'e'I"('s"'~-- and went towards crossroga-dsVii'-of..._:Saiig.ravn1a fmain road. She narrated the incident 'to.'hefrnother-in-law, who was aiiing froni fever.' day of the incident, her husband 'had the lands. On the following day 'Tpolice enquired her and recorded her sta eat.

83. The above said evidence of P.Ws.1 to 6, 9 "and 10 has to be appreciated and scrutinized to find out as to whether the said witnesses P.Ws.1 to 6, 9 and 10 had witnessed the incident and that their xx/Q;

m93W evidence about the incident is truthfull, reliable, consistent and cogent to help the prosecuftion in proving the guilt of the accused about vijayendra, Siddegowda and Krishneg'o._wda.:VVini light of the facts and circurnsta'nAceS_ the bi' cross---examination and also the do_cuments'vtE1aij were got marked by the prosecution the It elicited in the if that his statement was of inquest panchananfsa:«{_was:=A__A dead body of Krishne§jovl;da'LV.':Eve'nf[th'e«.indt:ge'st panchanama on the dead and Vijayendra also took placelitherel'fillowever, his statement was _ reg:o'r<:led o'nl_y"onc':e. As soon as the police came observed the injuries found on the dead iihéreafter, they enquired him and other pRerso'nsv""'who were found present there and re thereafter obtained complaint from ' '''..VVGoyindegowda(P.W.3). Govindegowda is the son--in-- "law of deceased Krishnegowda. Whatever that he has witnessed he has stated before the police when his statement came to be recorded during the __94W inquest panchanama proceedings. His house is situated on the southern side of Sa..iiigra-.ma-- Hampapura road facing north.

Krishnegowda at a distance o.f""abfou't~::haif_p kiiometer from his house. '"ho':ise'<::;'of' Krishnegowda is at a di'sta_nceV"o.flVE«00irfeejzlgwphen Vthgg. 2.1:! street branches from Itfiis further stated that there in Mirie viliage during the took place.

A1 to they have got some accused Nos.1 to 5 were from agriculture and from Coolie elicited in his cross-

ex§an1i.natioi1iﬂthatvi Krishnegowda had gone to his 'ihlousle-?..twi«cVe once at 10.30 A.M. and tater at 11.30 ._ came to his house at 10.30 A.M. he ca'me':.'fr"om the rice mill. At what time, * 5~€_rish'negowda had been to that miii prior to coming °-itothis house at 10.30 A.M. is not known to him. Krishnegowda, who came to his house at 10.30 A.M. had a cup of tea in his house and proceeded to his house. when he informed his sister about the phone \.

u95m call, which he had received, she told him that Krishnegowda had gone to the rice miil and h"'a--d not come home. He had not seen Krishnegowda_»goihg"to the Mill again after he left his house__ov:erif_a. tea. It is true that Vijayendhra and are 7 the close friends of his brothersin-elaw-ekrislanegowdaL and had been to K.R.Naga'i2o"n true to suggest that Viiiaiyeyndra who returned from search of his brother--in:_*'law§Kris_hneg:owdafa~5.._tiiey had heard that Krishnegovqhédaiihvhad 'aijssiaulted. Siddegowda and Vijay_en_dra'i"t:Vi--d_::"no't~.:cem--e.' along with Krishnegowda wheniivhel house at 11.30 A.M. S,i§:ldegowd"a-. Vijayendra did not come along with 'Ki-ishngegéowda while he was returning from the miil ._ to_hi's:'h_o_u's'e""at 11.30 A.M. He has not stated before tiI"1'e police during inquest panchanama proceedings is when his statement came to be recorded that around 7:12.15 noon, Vijayendra and Siddegowda who had gone to K.R.nagar Court came back to Mirle and got down at the bus stand and they came to know that someone had picked up quarrel with his brother-in- _95_ law and as such, they went in search of him towards the mill and later they came along with his bra_ther- in-law-Krishnegowda and one Vishwanyathiyl'tollbitd farewell to his brother-in-law, as statement as per Ex.D:l.. It 2s"'fu:~thé,r eli:eitetlv"in his E cross-examination that when his".brotlj¢.rg'in-'lavwlwasp returning from the mill'a_nly four._VoVr_"(fi\i'e "persons were following hi,rr":~..__' Helhasljynot_state'cl 'before the Police that while proceeding towards his road, he also S/o.Ramegowda, Krish__n.e.gowtia:»._ ' V ogtaooke Ra megowda, Gooke Ramelgowclal Vsy/:o.{Sa':ri*a.::l"34ranigowda, Somu S/o.Gooke La4i{(&sVhmego'w_cV_lVa'y M:.T.Annegowda s/ofrhimmegowda, S/o.Marigowda, Lakshmegowda "' ._o. ' W La ksh meg owda, H a n 1.: ma n th egowda Siio.S-til3i3':egowda, Hanumantha S/0.!-lanumamana iiaamaklrishnegowda, Siddappa S/o.Lakshmegowda, '.:Ku'n1ara S/o.l(oile Kempaiahna Chandra, Janardhana '"S/o.Javarappanagowdaiah and other forming themselves into a group of people, armed with deadly weapons like choppers coming from the xﬁgi _97W opposite direction as found in his statement as per Ex.D2 and D2(a). He has not stated before the police that all the persons were found in thatigjroup assaulted fallen Vijayendra as found in as per Ex.D2. He has not stated befo.refthe::' that after naming the namesaaof.vajriouslpp'assailants; who assaulted Siddegowda, restprof fallen Siddegowda with Ehopppper fauna in his statement Ex.D4. the police that A1 to A5_cIashe.d..withV._Vhis io'roVtlier'-in~law. What he meant. found in his police is that one among A1 to injured first and rest of followedllhimi. While his statement came to be ::'.eiccr:sdVed:'subsequently, he has not stated before the for some other reasons, he has m"entl.o'n'e'd the names of some other persons also rtap4art"fsrom A1 to A5 as found in his statement as per ""..iE'x.'DS. It is further elicited in his cross-examination "that he does not 'know as to whether accused No.3 5 was not in good terms with Krishnegowda and was abusing Krishnegowda about Krishnegowda talking \,iZ,'>i i agga '\ loosely about the mother of A-3. He is not a member of Mirle Panchayath. He does not belong'4..to.<4":'any political party either. He does not know _ terms and conditions Narayanagowda~~».I¢ei:afne'--ggthge it President of Mirle Grama Pancha:ya.l§'hlﬂﬂone'"of__thve' accused now standing:'~..befoi'-ex theV""'..;:.o_urt3 contractors by profession. iééid from Mirle Panchayath :Viit"ngV.."accused persons. Apart from A1 to A5 are the foliowerisé does not have any iteiiidencing it. One Krishn_eg_owwdia;,.:.(%:ook«eé:'i!amegowda, M.T.Annegowda, Hale Mirleg Annegnvidawiianumanthegowda are the leaciers.of Ja'nathadal in their village. His brother-in- law .t'h«e leader of the Congress party in their vi'i'il.aVge;§";t_' i:fr'i'i.Ot true to suggest that Congress party has lostits image to some extent in their village. It i.i's.-__truVVe. that in the election held to the Mirle "'Pa'nchayath, majority members of Banathacial were '"electeci. It is not true to suggest that all the accused persons were the strong supporters and they were canvassing for Janathadal in the election held to '} "ﬁg _99a Mirle Panchayath. Even prior to the Mlrle panchayath election or even after that deceased Krishnegowda had any grouse against the accused. Krishnegowda had no relationship with the- even politically also. So far as the:':$.!anathadal..V'i"V, supporters are concerned, they...gvirere'4,co.n's.i'der.in§} Siddegowda and Vijayendra as trusted ifolloﬂw'ers"'sy of deceased Krishnegowd'Va.=«_V'V:The accusedalgvere not having any right of in the village. The kerosemei._oili.'useci"t.o'i':bge'*V"distributed by the Sociew":_V Secretary of the the relative of deceased Krishnegowda; not the supporter of Jarfiatnadal However he has volunteered that .A distribution of kerosene oil, there was "~.s'o.me" and consequently cases have been registered both against accused persons and "deceased Krishnegowda, Siddegowda ' and '7-Zvijayendra. It is further elicited in his cross- 'examination that {after he received a pseudo phone call, he was very much frightened about the safety of his brother-in-law--Krishnegowda. Though he felt 'péjga ~100w to inform the police over phone, the telephone line was found to be cut. His telephone was in order. He tried to contact Saligrama police over phonef...Vlfieih_as not stated before the police or in his exani_i'n'a~t'ie.§f~i.nE' chief that he tried to contact V$a»ligra_:¥1-,~,..=over'=» phone after the receipt ps'e.,u.'do.._.ip'h'on'ef-i..__cali§ Shankarananda rice millviis-.._Vat from his house. He feit brother-in- law on receipt s.pho'nfe:call and for that purpose, hepvwpas to get his he was found coming is further elicited from his cross~exa"n1ina'tio'n' after the arrival of his bro§their--in-law;Vheitold him to remain in his house apprehending danger to his life. Krishnegowda ,giite«r his house did not secure any weapon wih"ilev*--.Vhevwas in his house. His brothea---in--law sent V. *words'' to Siddegowda and Vijayendra and he asked i"-thehi to bring weapons as a safety measure. It was i V' "further elicited from his cross-examination that he has not stated before the police about the receipt of pseudo phone cal! received by him when his XE-5% m101m statement came to be recorded by the police on 18.11.1995. He enquired his brother-in-law'*--._as to why he is taking all the weapons with told him that he is apprehending thatsoimjexigiaiaitaii' may take piace near his res:iclen'tial"--,ho:.isei«_and7=as":a 11' security measure for reaVching'.hi's_.house Asaf'eInyjhe'is taking them. He has not'inVentio.ned_"the'_:niarnessiof and A5 as the pers9ns.~iisaiAdZ'j4to"elhave1been moving armed with weapons to A3 for committing oifiiiiiiivsyyv§ijirfother--in--iaw. He knew come along with his brothAer._«inx§law..ftigringv---._second time. It is further eiiciteécl"-ll': that he has not stated. beforeithe. police that his brother-in-law panche and shirt while washing his face ._a'h_dA his brother-in-law was going out of his hotise. he asked him to keep the scooter inside 1' 'ianyd get the weapon which had kept in his scooter. 'Tl-ilieijhas also denied the suggestion that his brother- "in--l.aw had several enemies. He has stated that he was keeping a weapon for his safety and not for the reason that he was having several enemies. He has 'W 2 I W102"

not stated before the police that his brother-in-law was having several enemies and for that reason"-.as a safety measure he was keeping a weapon...w»it'ht:'"hiiizray always as found in his statement, E1.-{,5-ﬁp. V' given his statement as per thati'h.ei'-hapsinoit stated that his brother-,--i_n---|aw.Aliwhiley:..iiea'vi"ng:.4"{.he=, house collected a choppe'r:'and tl'ieV_n"iere:rioved his' shirt and panche and kept'_the_ iﬁ"his vehicle and asked him to inside his compound. While l§rishTa~iegowda_.__leaving his house, he was "his hand and it was visible to One Mohan, Sujayakumar, Vishwainwaéth, Sid_d'ego:wf.a4}Vvijayendra, himself were all present ailonigg with . Krishnegowda. One and Govindegowda were coming to catch the bus and they also came near liishouse. Even the persons who had come wityh his brother--in-law for the second time were "present when his brother---in---law left his house. It is """further elicited in his cross-examination that it is not true to suggest that on the day of the incident, leaders of both Janatha Dal and Congress-I had K ~wl03-~ come to Mirle. It is true that on either side of the road leading to the house of §(irshnegowd4a_.V_i'-there are residential houses. While proceedin_gl'_Tfrorn----:E.a-st' to West on the road leading» to .'th*e--ef_houseV it Krishnegowda from his house,'»._aft_er..4few._crosséS,.._o~:}e will come across the ch'a'n_ne|."'-..3'he irie;3,jn'est _.road,:* leading to the house from his house is the one pavssing ll€\iG:lit§._tf.!iaAecu|vert. On that day, he had 50 ft. from his housethe day of the proceeding on the mai.,{ !-oancli west, had never turned to cross house. The house of Pu't§tAaswami§;o.vvda is situated on l-§ampapura- Sa,l'igr_alrna:4vA"main road itself. The State Bank of Miisere:'i'5.V.atl;'a"'distance of about 400ft. from the main road tovvards north. It is not true to say that Vijayendera received injuries while reaching "'l{r£shnegowda's house. Vijayendra received the "injuries first. 71He has not stated before the Court that when Vijayendra reached near the house of Krishnegowda, he received the injuries. He has VJ' M104- stated that he received the injuries near the house of Kendagannana Krishnegowda, whose house is.___at a distance of 100 feet from his house. Thjerefgiare residential houses on either side of Kendagannana Krishnegowdav~a'nd- it took place, the inmates of the either side of the ._of__1r-Ké'ng'arn'nana'*V Krishnegowda, remained their houses, closing the doors. Soon aftelrlthel' back to his house phone and again of occurrence. He had not It is further elicited in his even though A1 to A5 conjmiitted they Inurder of Krishnegowda, he has ._ . iv . :m.ent_i:oAn%e.d''--in his statement that was recorded by the the inquest, that apart from them, ot.hers=.L.were also found and participated in the "co--:_nm'ission of crime. He has not stated before the "police in his statement that his brother-in-law was it "taking leadership of the Congress-I faction in their village and he was working along with his followers and the accused belonging to Janata party could not

-«l05~ tolerate the same and consequently, they pre- planned for themselves and armed with chojjpers brutally murdered the aforesaid persons, _._:'in his statement, Ex.D8. It is further cross-examination that it is not to he has not stated before the QV|::'{(_'.D"|'i*£e thvat'..Vafter"; committal of the _V of '-lﬁriivshfniegowda, Vijayendra and nearfthe dead bodies and tasted dead bodies and went" recorded on 13.11.19§§ further elicited that when,_all_ -'persons received injuries, he spot from where he wigtnfessed thedﬂincidient and he was not apprehending d_ange:r«-to him when the accused were assaulting :itv.V.i_s'AV~f.f'u'rther elicited that he has stated before the poiiifcéi that he being frightened, went near his house""and stood there and watched the entire '7iVn'ci'dent. A3 had sustained some injuries and he has i it "hot stated that on the day of the incident, several peopie who had come to assault his brother-in-law also had sustained injuries and that he might have \.§3~<{$ ~«««106~w stated before the police that all the accused persons might have received minor injuries. He hasWde'niVed the suggestion that either on 18.11.1995;d'ur'in.g_V'th:e« _ inquest proceedings or on 19.11.1995». never came to be recorded. T11: is..fAur't--her' eliicitedglin his cross-examination tha'i;-.__i_t is"tr_u'e regime of Narayanagowdaiviviéaspvthe of Mirle Grama Panchayat; were conferred any_of the....benei'i.tsi._fr'om'fttiat panchayath. He was nothadigngi"ﬁftyfpersoinaiitnowledge about Narayanaigouédan of these accused persons ._ for benefits from Grama Panchaiiath as a President. None of__jthese accusvednpersons are the members of [.13-5. It is not true that in Mirle viilage, accused persons belong to their coﬁamuniw, they are poorest persons. To his iznowlvédge, the accused are not poor persons. He "'ha's':stated in his second statement that the accused ~-are poor persons.

-107-

84. It is clear from the scrutiny of the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the prosecution that the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that Vijayendra, SiddegA~o94\.'I_§!':-'='!'__i:4}.é".jt.v«_,1:"c!.« Krishnegowda suffered homicidal de_ath".~«... report on the body of Vijay.endra«;a«s inquest report on the body of'---Siddegowda "asj Ex.P10O and inquest r'e'p.Vort on~..tlae of Krishnegowda as cleairiy show that the said three_V_v'i'pers_onis--*"~h.ad';__suffered fatal injuries and'4'h.a:d clliedy at "thfe3."'spo"t. Further, the evidence._ ofV'thVe.._:Med«i.ca.!_yQfficer, who conducted the postmortem e'xa'in'inatiVon over the dead body of Kri"s;hnegowd'a,V_VVV$idc1egowda and Vijayendra would Viclea.-ly' ishowthat they suffered homicidal death. 'V "l3W.45 - Dr. J. Sandeep has deposed in his ihiiiﬂiievidence that he conducted the postmortem it kaxamination over the dead body of Vijayendra and "he has given description of the twelve external injuries found on the dead body of Vijayendra and the same were ante-mortem in nature. On internal

-«~108--

examination of Cranium and Cervical Vertebra beneath injury No.1, he found that cervical vertebra had been cut completely and he has death was due to bleeding and shock_.a$:"_'a.'re.su_lt of multiple injuries sustained toizbneckb;j,s"hbou'ide'r,.V~a'rﬁ3s; legs a_nd back of the chest. I-leiihas p.roduc'edi} t'he'=p postmortem report as clearly corroborates his elicited in his cross-expaminaptiopntp his evidence that vijaye:1§dra..?"b5ai=fe.+aai; death and the defence as iiwaaaa also show that they did niot dispute._:jtha't..i_:Vijayendra suffered homicidal death. A i ét'i..%.j:Similarly, PW.50 -- Dr. Thejaprabha postmortem examination over the dead body Siddegowda on 18.11.1995 from 4:30 p.m. to=§:3VO p.m. She has narrated the external injuries on the dead body of Siddegowda and has "given description of the seven external injuries found on the dead body of Siddegowda and has opined that death was caused due to shock and keg ~109- hemorrhage due to injury to skuil bone and brain and brain vesseis. PW.50 has further deposed..i_tih_at she has produced the postmortem regis_teAr"ane-..:

relevant entry pertaining toyyyysiddegowday'"igV=_gcii;w. marked as Ex.P65(a).

37. PW.51---Dr'._ postmortem examivniatioyni-V_yo:yer"~-fife__dead body of Krishnegowdaon ;4:30 p.m. and 6 p.m. and injuries V:i.'_:I:1:'VV'VVVi{riVVs'hnegowda and has opined due to shock and multiple deep cut injuries to brain, headvyivneciik and to the extremities (arms ieiosjjand except injury No.12, all other external fatal in nature and all the injuries were avntisfmortem in nature. He has produced the V. postmortem report as per Ex.P?O. Nothing has been .' '"eiIi'cited in the cross-examination of PWs.50 and 51 disbelieve their evidence that Siddegowcla and Krishnegowda suffered homicidal death and their evidence is clearly corroborated by the postmortem _11Q_ examination report produced by them as per Ex.P65(a) and Ex.P70 and wherefore, we ho.ld..._tfh_at the prosecution has proved beyond reasonabIé~V.'d*ou§b.t"

that Krishnegowda, Siddegoyyda a;I'd"---lIija'ye'nVdra if suffered homicidal death.

88. Similarly, the proved beyond reasonable' Vishwanath sustained injury' in :ti*re.-- Doctor who examined.' if; certificate in respectof PW.51 -- Dr. K.S. Murthy evidence that he examined Vishwa'n'ath' at 3:00 13.111. and found thefoliowing" externial injuries: "_1._C.ontusion wound measuring 2" x 1" on the , hip;

Horizontal crushed lacerated injury to the . ieft palm of the left arm;

-- Abrasion wound 1/2 " x 1/2" on the right elbow."

xﬁf ««»11Ji~ and has accordingly, issued the wound certificate as per Exs.P90 and 91 and the relevant entry injthe accident register pertaining to the injury Vishwanath was marked as Ex.P89(a). 'nathjiagii been elicited in his cross--exa:m"i'nation thajt'v'the"--said, injuries were not found on the.__body and the evidence of corrob'or_"E\txe'diV'VVbyV the' certificate producedhy hiiﬁmasiijpe'r,_Exs.iP'90"'and P91. Accordingly, we hold-i."Vth'vat .Ai_'.pri;_secution has proved that ":\;(ijshv\i_an,ath has sustained injuries in in which, Vijayendra, Krishneg--o:wdaV"andV,"Siddegowda sustained injury and died, l 8'9}...ﬂowever, the prosecution in order to bring the guilt of the accused for which they ' are charged must further prove that the homicidal i".-lea't:h of Vijayendra, Siddegowda and Krishnegowda "was caused by accused Nos.1 to 4 and 15 and they also caused injury to PW.2 -- Vishwanath. On re- appreciation of the evidence of the eye-witnesses - M1121-~--

PWs.1 to 6, 9 and 10, who have supported the case of the prosecution as referred to above, it .iS=-_cie'ar that the evidence of the compiainanir"'*"i§_fj-PW-:3'_ Govindegowda is contrary to the compiairit bf». him, which set the criminal law 4an:d___tVi7;e investigation into the incident. itis ciesar' 'o;n,_,pe_r§usa£_:'. of the complaint fiuledx" ..

Govindegowda it Srinivas, who is the, brotherfi.n;!Va,vv deceased Krishnegowida«:.1:"was::"with and was available this statement was record;-d_ he has not been treated as his statement. However, PW.%f3, who i's~A..i{rishr1egowda, who is the son-in-law, stater_nent°of Krishnegowda treated as complainant statement. However, the statement of"""PW..:34G'ovindegowda, who is the son-in-law of i(r'ishnegowda has been recorded and treated as riomiplaint as per Ex.P2 and investigation has "commenced on the basis of the said complaint. On perusal of the contents of the said Ex.P2, it is clear that in the complaint, no overt act has been

-1l3~ attributed to any of the accused and according to the averments made in the complaint, on 18.11.1995, PW.3 -- Goviradegowda, who is a resident of_"'Hale Mirie Village had come to Mirle to meet law -- Krishnegowda and when he wentto-.,the"~h4ouise of Krishnegowda, Krishnegowda:'4'was house and his wife Rajamma i.e.,V.mother}-vinFiaw"ofﬁL PW.3 informed PW.3 thatiivheri hus5a.n'd~"fsad',:gone to V Shankarananda and' since the complainant wanted to'i's.pe'al<:ito'~h.isffather-in--iaw, he proceeded tow;e:.i~'ds the, said l§i'ce..M.Vi«li at about 12:15 to 12:__30_ father---in--law going ahead of him éandi he" to catch up with him. At thgatutiime, VSi.ddego-wda and Vijayendra got down which came from K.R. Nagara and they wereVVéo'rn_iri~ig"'towards his father-in-iaw. Ali of them jo'i."ned---V:ashvijayendra and Siddegowda were ciose 'assocyiates of Krishnegowda. The accused, as "described in the complaint, who had previous enmity """against Krishnegowda and his followers -- Siddegowda and Vijayendra surrounded them and assaulted them and directed them towards the ~n114~ house of Dasharatha and assaulted with the hands and choppers and caused the death of Krishnegowda, Siddegowda and Vijayendra. Thereafter, he has given description of the«~~riajm'e's 17 persons and has stated that the 5a3.d]'17~ and others have }caused detathi'_:pof3 Vijayendra and Siddegowda. PW,"h'.3""haS f%utti1e.'i- stated'g in his complaint -- Vth_ia'"t-hi' (11) Smt.V Shakuntalamma (P'Jli';'-4) (PW.13) (3) Nagamma (PVV_.V_8v) .",/.1'.ﬁarayanashetty (PW.12) ha'vé;.atwitri-essed 'th:'e':7'iincident. However, when,_ the is appreciated in the light of the con1piain't"*--hnvV.him as per Ex.P2, it is clear thatthe evidence: of the compiainant (PW.3) is .tfo-..¢the averments made in the complaint and description of the incident is also contrai:-v"to the averments made in the complaint and itis clear that the description of the incident is consonance with the description of the incident it "given by other witnesses and not according to the complaint given by PW.3 as per Ex.P2 as according to the evidence adduced before the Court,

--l15~m Krishnegowda, Siddegowda and Vijayendra started from the house of PW.1 and they were going together and he has not stated that Vishwahriath, Vijayendra and Siddegowda got down and joined Krishnegowda. Further,Hno~._o'u_e~rt %act__Vf whatever is attributed to accusedi_iNos';;t to According to the deposition is 'ontlyﬂg accused Nos.1 to 4 wh'o._a'ssauiteVd and caused the death os Krasnbnegewa'a,.yssaaegawaa and Vijayendra, though act'~.iVs'f-fattr'ibuted to any of the accus'e'cif;-y.a:'-'i1d a_cciordin'g::to'thecomplaint, there were:':__17_ >ya<vn:éivv«.__others, who assaulted and causedftheif death" of ':i'('r.ishnegowda, Siddegowda and Vija§yen.dra. eiridence of PW.3 before the Court woﬁuidi iincriminate only accused Nos.1 to 4 and 15 ~réfgardiri_g__ overt act committed by them and cafusirig' the death of Vijayendra, Siddegowda and 'i(Vi'ishn'egowda.}" Therefore, it is clear that much '7in'1'pfortance cannot be attached to the evidence of if '""PW.3, who is the complainant in this case, who has ciearly given a go bye to the complaint given by him in the first instance, on the basis of which, case was ix/%

----116~w registered and investigation was completed and his evidence is contrary to the complaint on material particulars about the accused, who assaulteii-.and caused the death of Krishnegowda, Siddegov'vd:as:4'a;lid., Vijayendra.

90. pw.1 - M.B. SVrin«ivas'is"t~he b_rfcit.hfe:4+inii§ia-lv'*»v_ of Krishnegowcla and it on~.a'&pcprec'i:ation of the evidence of PW.;:::\{..,,4:ha.th itigiisjclearly elicited in the cross-examination o_f_:' the house of Krishinegyowida at:"a»ﬂdistain'ceiV of 500 feet when the second.streetVibi-'anich_:é's.:'from the main road. There were _vrival"faictitoams'=in"'ii$lirle village, during the period in'-'whi,ch the incident took place. Accused Nos.1 to 5 iconolie work and they have got some laa34dedv..'pijoperty also. It is also elicited that Siddegowda and Vijayendra did not come along with "-"_Alirishnegowda when he came to his house at 11:30 M Further, Portion of the statement of PW.1 as per Exs.D1, D2, D4 and D5 would clearly show that he has made the said statement as per Exs.D1, D2, D4 and D5 and has denied the averments made in A. %m117--

the said statement to suit the case of' the prosecution as unfurled before the Court. It _4isV_:'-slear from I':'x.D1 that PW.1 has stated that at _ p.m., Viﬁayendra and Siddegowda, to "' the Court at i(.R. Nagara got-._do'wr;' learnt that some persoj-|'s=.,_V whowere}ini.n1i<§ally-_* disposed of towards Krishnegowda v.Ve--i-evnjgtivarrelling with Krishnegowda voifthe. and thereafter; while he was_'gOing:.~to':.t:hAeV brother--in- law "" " brother--in--law, Si ddeg oyvd'a,%"::- --' V Vis hwanath, we re talkilng to walking on the road and they = his brother-in-law (K..VV,i4s;;:Ah'neegow"cEa:_v)V:to his house. It is clear from the :Ast'a,xtienj'seAnt:4»a~s per Ex.D2 that Gopalagowda's son -- i"'Ka'i.5._Vi«A@:«V"_'S_id~deoowda, Manju, Ramegowda's son V. Jafaraz-"--na',v";Ramakrishnegowda's son - Ramesha, H 'A A44"'.ve..:Raam_e'goi:vda ' s- son -- Kempegowda, Gooke .' Raimegowda ' 5 son -- Krishnegowda, '"Sambranigowda' s son -« Goorke Ramegowda, Goorke Lakshmegowda's son - Somu, Thimmegowda's son

--- MCI'. Annegowda, Marigowda's son -- H.M.

-118w Annegowda, Gooke Lai<shmegowda's son -- Lakshmegowda, Subbegowda ' s Edison I-ian u ma nthe owda I-£an&i_m'a"n?n.jrn.fai*;.a_"' . I .' I ' ~. 7 , Ramakrishnegowda ' s son 9'... 'I-'fahfur1"1aVr'ntha, "' Lakshmegowda's son --- Sidiciapilpa-.,:' son - Manju, Koiie Kempaiahana chan:_:ira._'v«s.VVson Kumara and .'.ia\:r_arappVa4_Ii:ia:__ 'v~§owd'aiaha_5is son Janardhana and otherxshaci -group and they were hand on the road and It is clear that other persons, who Zwerexggavisoassauited Siddegowda with chopperssand It is ciear from Ex.D8, portions. of t'he:statement given by PW.1 that his .broti:e'ra-infiayw - Krishnegowda was a leader of and was working with his compahionihs and had made a good name and the peogplej who were envying him, had preplanned and in a group and assaulted them with choppers "and caused the death.

K i

91. Further, there is aiso contradiction in the evidence of PWs.1 to 3 regarding the ovegrtgact attributed to accused Nos.1 to 5 and Vishwanath, according to the prosec_L':"iti:or:,=.is'A injured eye-witness in this case and on -apijrecgivation of the evidence of Pw.2, .andi*th1"e._.evidence"

Medical Officer, PW.51, theViim-osecut_ion.V.=hasuworovedif beyond doubt that Pi\l'J.,_2 sﬁstained'-injuryinthe same incident, in which, V-i'jAav',?'ehdra,._:iV'i{'r_i.shnegowda and Siddegowda" 's;:s'tair1_ed --i.~ﬁju.ryx-i_'a.n.d:f'died as already held by "the question as to whetl3_er--_ has proved the homicidal death ofil{rlish'i:egow:d'a,'siddegowda and Vijayendra andjiinjiury caused to Pw.2. ﬁvidence of Pw.2 has to b'e,i'apo|9ec:iated in the light of the facts elicited in the ifcro-ss¥e§§am'iina.tion of PW.2 and in the light of the evi4deri--ce"of the other witnesses examined in the case. fit is elicited in the cross--examination of Pw.2 lthiatif there are two factions in their village and both "the factions are at loggerheads since a long time and he was very close to Krishnegowda. To his knowledge, he was not having any apprehension of L95» ~l20m danger to his life. Krishnegowda was not having apprehension of danger to his life till the dat.eV_io.fiithe incident and P.S.I., himself recorded He did not read his statementmso reco'rd:ejd,'byv'~himu. if He has not stated before the Pioliceeafs is true that Krishen=;iow.da,f'~..§idde§joyu'daW Vijayendra were active of «-Congress and accused Nos.1 to of the Janata Dal party. It.~.is truethiatiiiiitotal hostility between jjéainidiimembers of J.D.S. in thevi_r__Vv'i'i~iaiges.;:__ were found standi__ng._ of 100 feet away from accused fifteen Congress members wer_§e'standing:_VV:a't a: distance of 10 to 15 feet from Apart from the party members, there "wereVi'some~;"other persons from the locality also nuxmbevringi about 15 to 20 persons. It is further V. eixicitevdithat he has not stated before the Police in ""th'e"i'statement as per Ex.D11 that the accused "'"persons are poor persons. He has not given any statement to the Police as per Ex.D12 that the accused are not brave to commit murder. It is 'Via/3 ~121+r further elicited that after he reached the house of Srinivasa, Krishne gowda secured his fo|¥ow.ers4_"a.nd also the weapons. It is true that Krishneg:o'wd'a~--:w?:_S' always possessing a weaponfgwith stated before the Police that having several political enemies and he=used...to !11ave,i* a Macchu for his self protectioin and' to keep the same in his It is eiicited that Krishnegowda w'en.tfto'- No.2 on his leg. _ \,(i.r:en'.'l{'rishnegowda made such he evaded that blow:¥_an_d- the Macchu wielded by Krishnegofwdfawstrucltthe."ground and was broken. It is ),c§le'ar. frond') evidence of PW.2 that though he n1ade"«--..Vstatement before the Police as per he has denied before the Court of ha'{iingV:'na'ade such statements. Ex.D10 in his statenient before the Police has stated that the "'acc'used thought that if Krishnegowda is alive, he "would be danger to them and wherefore, Siddegowda (accused No.1) and his brother - Manja (accused No.2), Jayarama (accused No.3) and his :33 kl/.

~--122--

brother -~ Ramesha (accused No.4) and Andani Ningegowda's son Manjunatha (accused No..1V$~)4_:'a.nd Paiiwan Janardhana (accused No.17) to cause the murder of Krishnyegyowda}Siiddienowdio"

and Vijayendra and had 1'-._go_t*..:th'e.i.ir.,« sharpened. Similarly, E$_(;<D_11ﬂgot cross-examination of that PW.2 has stated before t"i1'at:'y"th'e accused are poor peopie and thmfcould_not.«"b'ythemselves vent to cause the support of the their abetment and financ__iaI._ of Krishnegowda, Siddegowjda is caused. It is also cleaiérivfrom thelyevidence of PW.3 -Govindegowda that there_sis,yin:consistency in his evidence regarding the 1"descriotion'~1j'o'f the incident and the overt act att'i'ibuVted";to the accused. It is also clear from the fac.t_s elicited in the cross-examination of Pw.2 that has stated that after he was injured, he ran "away from the spot and his evidence is contrary to the evidence of PWs.1 and 3.

-1.23%

92. The evidence: of PW.4 - H.D. Shakuntala has to be considered in the light of the facts elicited in her crossmexamination and in the light of thehotgher witnesses examined by the prosecution as to whether her evidence is truthfuVl__.a_'nd':.reliabI'e and worthy of acceptance. It examination of PW.4 that it is--_true waiting for the bus in the stop," wlhrich is situate towards east of theL_"hou:se :r:;ir'ifniyasa."A is also true that she saw the western direction froin}jg.the.:3placé': whiere'-.shée was standing. She coulgd to who were the persons gatheredafin the 'crowdréwiwhen she was standing in thegybfus stop, galata was taking place in front of the Puttaswamygowda. It is true that she l"('riVs.l1__n:f.:j.§t_:j'owda and his followers coming from the" ho.{;se"'"'of Srinivasa. She has reiterated that she saw them coming from the side of the house of flﬁrinfivasa and not from the house of Srinivasa. It is '"true that Krishnegowda always used to wear panche / 'datti' . When she saw Krishnegowda on the date of the incident, he was not wearing 'panche' . It is M124"

true that Krishnegowda proceeded towards the place where the group was gathered. She cannpotbsay about the geographical direction. She facing towards the house of Srinivasa."i*t--:is»true'~that'*~ if the crowd of people was her.

house of PuttaswamygowVda_V was-_o'n Vher'"%'ieft,_VVsVid§e the place where she wasV__vs'ta:ndi_ng""mi_tvheEiopposite direction. The __not come from her right sideto Puttaswamy gowda. ._and his people holding%__arms-~ii§_:.their=ha'n'ds'. is true that the house of Pu'ttaswan1.yg_Vowd«a["is situate at a distance of 50 feet from4'trhe"pl.ace.. she was standing. It is notgtrue to s'u.gigestV:ithat Vijendra rushed towards the g~roupv.ic_on"sisting of the accused. Vijendra went extent of one fathem from the group of"'Kris..hne'§owda. Vijendra first sustained the blows. 3 whenfthe accused tried to assault Vijendra, he did °hVot"come back, but, proceeded forward, towards the "group of the accused. It is true that Krishnegowda and others followed Vijendra. when Krishnegowda and others proceeded towards the group of the -125- accused, it formed a crowd. However, she has denied the suggestion that the group of the accused and Krishnegowda had mixed up. Krishnegow_dai~did not use the said weapons. Siddegowda.--€rii.as»'~éi,rmt;3d' with 'Devarakatthi'. When Krishnegowda:'_thi'evi.i "

chopper towards Manja (accuiseci'No.2), h'a:cl...s't:iiil not sustained injury. He"sa'v_v the-..cho,ppe'r1throVw3n Krishnegowda falling on «-ianidpgvvvbreaking into pieces, from On that day, she left thescene'vof':occ,uijre'nc,e.hatter seeing the incident. __ isawiithe accused in the case permission of the Jaii authoritiesavhout':'.2~.?i::'in'onths next before the date of hergcross-exanjiivnation (the witness cross-examined The accused are not related to her.

i"'Thiere"'w'_a.s need for her to meet the accused in jaii. sherhes denied the suggestion that she went to ﬁseeﬂ the accused during judicial custody with an it "':.nte'ntion to ask them to give her ransom for not ""deposing against them, but, she has stated that she had accompanied some of their relatives to the jail. It is also elicited in her cross---examination that she W126"

did not talk to the accused when she went to jail on the said day, but, she had only accompaniedmthe relatives of the accused to the jail t€§'§'"""S'e?.'sj%--.:__f.'1'5i!_j¢f3' accused.

93. It is clear from the fEICtST.'eli;Ci_ti€£fi Vin-lthe cross-examination of PW.4 - Shakd"u.ntala"Vt_hat not attributed the facts...'/ilelicited.in:"_.hérVM"cross--'V' examination that sVhe__was'"sta:r:di'ng atdaclinstance of 50 feet from the scenefof'offence-%--a'nd'_._in front of the house of Putt.a.sv=Jan§iygowda.°:'SVhVe' described that there-.__was >ofl_jf:e_rsons among whom Vijendra came forward'.-- Tl1"e"'f:acts elicited in her cross- ex»a_§n1in.ation' also show that Krishnegowda Wand others, were also armed and Krishnegowda 'chopper towards accused No.2 and the choppv'er"iell down and was separated from the handle'. Further, the facts elicited in the cross-

"'e)'ta'mination of PW.4 would also show that though i V' "this witness is not related to the accused, she had been to Jail see the accused along with the relatives of the accused and did not even talk to the accused. <1 W127---

Further, the facts elicited in her cross--examination would clearly show that there was a group consisting of accused, who had assembled alt"-.ythe scene of offence. Therefore, the evidence..'ofl:'__I5l;1l§ZsA cannot be said to be truthful and rel'iv:a~bIe[l_.'aVndf' cannot be said that she has from a place where she was stan'cling._.-".l.IAn' view.'oVf'=, the fact that she has llvladjmitted ~._in "cross- examination that there persons and it was Krishnegowda,__'lithe chopper at accused N_o}'2i:jy.i:l:.'before'jfavlieéed assault on Krishaegowda.~a»nd_"ot:h~e_rs.f Also, having regard to the factthatvsheahfadtgonte to see the accused though the_§f"a'ccused"'vvVere not related to her. She did even .' ta.ll< to ~t,heA"accused. Therefore, the evidence of Pw.4 ,§§'f'.._no't7'h,gipf'u.l to the prosecution by itself or in courrobvolratling the evidence of the said eye- '' it "wit_nes"ses.

94. The evidence of PW.5 - M.l.. Mohana as deposed in his examination-in-chief has already been narrated. It is elicited in the cross- i c;29_ the house of Srinivas, they went to the house of Srinivas. The house of Dasharath is situateV.Von:it_he southern side of Saligrama road. It ispnioit' --'-to suggest that any political meeting was taking place near the house of true that in their viliage,"t_h'e_re were son'j'eiV..in*.f.iue3ntia!Vi* persons in Janatha Dal true to suggest that the ho-.ises'--. Janatha Dal are situate adjacent"'tof¥ Dasharatha. their village. It is true used to visit the house of 'After the house of Srinivas, there on the southern side of th..e§gSa!igraIi1'-a.V:road. One can reach the house of .' by proceeding on the second cross ~rAo.atd.V"' that the people belonging to Janata Dal are-lea residing near the northern culvert. He has 'agauinvviistated that on the northern side, there is an bridge, which is not a culvert. It is elicited that it "it is true that the SBM road crosses the Saligrama main road. The SBM road is situate on the northern side of the house of Srinivas. It is further elicited E ;,,/S;

7:1'

--l31--

that Vijayendra was leading their group. It is further elicited that Vijayendra was not arm_e.di'-with any weapon. Krishnegowda was matchugatti (chopper) and Siddegowd'a"vwasarmed with Devarakathi. The arms' vvjhaic§5h4l'tewe're hands of Krishnegowda andxsiddegowdar'wejree_yig;§ible to others. It is truethat l--e»aving«.VV:thje house of Srinivas, Krishnego\htd'a_A panche and started to provceed-'--is true that Krishnegowd.:a,l:after::':k_no:win4g:j'.Vth\at""there was threat to his l_if__e; ﬁirinivas with chopper. It is i:1_'ot__ that on that day, galata startedilaftervithett' entry into the house of Daslja"ra.thaV. true that on that day, his A"-was not recorded immediately after liiartsiyaI""oitt.ga,h_Po';ivo'e. He did not know as to who had filed thlelcvoimplaint in the case. It is true that at _::the__tiI1é'e. of the incident, the Janata Dal was a ruling r l It is not true to suggest that it would be "tough to lodge a case against Janata Dal people and that they have concocted a case against the poor accused.

U153 ~w132--

95. The evidence of PW.5 -- M.L. Mohana has to be considered in the light of the evidence of-.'the other eye-witnesses examined by the prosec'ut'i'cr;;. find out as to whether his evidence reliable and helpful to the pro$"ecut'ia.n'*i.to-:

the guilt of the accused l\los.1V't'oi4, 15,piJ';A7A'ar1d respondents herein. It is cleiar from._the."'ev"i;lence of if PW.5 that he has ':cie_pos'ed" seeing" accused Nos.1 and 3 near his colleigejiand._:iV'there;-after, he met Vishwa.nVath.Vp?'l51'.w.V2 him about accused Nos.1:_'and 3i'::'ii_asl»ng__iiin1-and his friend - Deepu. Thereaft'e:_f,ll at" of Vishwanath -- Pw.2, he,.n1et~ KrisVhn_egowda and informed him about the it and 3 chasinghim. Krishnegwoda liotihe house of Srinivasa and asked Sujay Kurnar-V:AVto".Vget Vijayendra and Siddegowda to the l-ouseyis of Srinivasa. when all of them were 'proceeding towards the house of Krishnegowda, the wincident took place. PW.5 has deposed in his examinationwinwchief that only accused Nos.1 to 5 came at the time of the incident, which is contrary to by

--133- the evidence of the other witnesses and he has not mentioned the name of accused No.15. The evidence of PW.1 and the complaint filed I:-oi"/""--.him would clearly show that he had named the F.I/R. and thereafter, charge-shee:t~.:'h'al_s~Vi'bee'n__V' filed only against accused clear from the evidence, of Pwlﬁ that. fathelrvgt belonged to Congress partlyiand he" saiplraorter of Krishnegowda afnd n-laccfusted 'belonged to Janata Dal Party. Furthe_r,'i','it .-'c:leafrn__fl'om the facts elicited in the"l;ro--ss¥exarra'in'atio1n».o.fT3'W~5 that on the date the statement was not recorded immediately Vafterfthefarrival of Police and he does not._il§;now as" has filed the complaint in the Therefore, the evidence of PW.5 cannot be l'"saAid,to"iie-trdthful or reliable so as to make basis for _V con"vict--i:ng"'.V the respondents herein for having if"l':;:com4_miVtted the offences alleged against them.

96. The efidence of PW.6 -- Sujaya Kumar has to be considered in the light of the facts elicited in his cross-examination as also the evidence of the

---l34--

other witnesses to find out as to whether his evidence is truthful and reliable and usefulv'for..b_lthe prosecution to bring home the guilt of t_h§;-. _ It is elicited in his cross--exan_1_i.natior;"t'h'at'_';Vi.tV"isV'jtruell"

to suggest that he was pre'-:~4enfl_:'r.=itthej:'scerine.'o_f occurrence when the Polic_e'»cam"ev.tio then."

same day. It is true th.a:t:'».s_onje inralhvazairs were prepared at the sceneof and he had put his signatures on:.""'sui::lj as mahazar witnesses... the Poiice did not Fiolice have recorded the persons on that day.

Duringlit-he Police to the scene of occulrrernce, Vhesistayied with them for about 2 to 3 4'M¢'.yVA"'that time, Police knew that he was an On that day, when he gave his sta't'em'-ent,'""he was aware of the manner in which the ':ur_deVr" took place. On that day, he stated before the .' Pollice the manner in which the murders took place "and Police recorded his statement. He ieft the scene of occurrence at 3 p.m., on the day of the occurrence. It is true that he was not present at the U26/2

--135--

scene on the day of occurrence till 7 or 7:30 p.n1. It is true that Police officers were present at thve_jS.c_le.ne of occurrence at 7:00 p.m. The pol_i~c:e"idVE'd*---._n§Q.f'. record his statement as theyhad alrr'eacl---,.',i'_':reco'rde.;l"' his statement in the afternoon. ;'_"1't:' t'h:at_"i?z.e was present at the scenelnear the house Aoifv«$.rin3ivas~..i' from 5 p.m. To 7:30 -25¢ ha's.:V.denied the suggestion that he the house of Puttaswamygowda betweien' and 7 p.m. It is not tr.u.-er, statement was recorded" fnahazar. Police took his in-'ahazar. Police officer of the rainkgigé of Police took his statenlent, liutiivheidoes not know his name. The .poli_ce_Vrecor'ded three inquest mahazars and mahazar i"'foVr'..5eiV2iﬁTE'.rthefclothes and spot mahazar. The Police "record his statement during inquest el.V:prvo.ceeVdings in inquest mahazar. It is true that on .0 the "arrival of the Police to their village, he came to 0 "know that Police case is lodged against many political leaders belonging to Janatha Dal Party. He has again stated that he learnt that the case is g w135w booked against accused Nos.1 to 5 only. He came to know about the implication of accused Nos.1 t.o._5 in the case when he was enquired by the has denied the suggestion that accused'A.':i'3os.:V;:l"itoihS are the most poor people in ti-Ieir.yil"iag:e.tVl!e does not know if accused i"a_re'~..pe"r«s'ons._ belonging to the financiai-ljfljackwardii:.lassV."" is' true that he is the dpersonj'-._, name Sujayakumar, son oi he has stated before the lfoli;;ce_ 5 are poor persons backward ciass.

He felt before the Police that mur'ders_haueliibeehxcommitted at the instigation andiwitrh the"conspiracy of some Janata Dal leaders. halisihseelfl the houses of Siddegowda and i'"V.ijayendVr'a, are deceased. It is not true to V . suggestiitiiat their houses are near the house of ititVi.'~44"V..:k€r5shne'gowda. The house of the deceased .' ikriishnegowda is situate on the northern side of T "Saligram main road. It is true that the houses of the Siddegowda and Vijayendra, who are dead are also situate towards northern side from Saligram - K.R.

--»137w Nagar main road. It is not true to suggest that the houses of Vijayendra and Siddegowda are situate near the park. Similarly, the house"-.g of Krishnegowda, the deceased is not situate It is elicited that he cannot say by whomsihachtsh he _ came to know about the life th'relat'to It is true that no one was,p_resent"by his.fside time. It is not true to sugg"es:tl»that there'-was no one in the park aiso. people were moving in the park. It is true to any one of the persons"rnfoviii_9 §tlf£':.'t:h.e' is not true that he could' out anything from the conversation_of'such»* persons. It is true that the said pers§ons~ werewtalking loudly. Those persons were '.As:tr.a;ngers~tVo*~--h_im. It is true that the said persons did i"'i:.o*l£_belloArIf_g. village. He told not to talk to V --V them. said persons were moving on the road kl"4':g:a'a1d.4_vvere talking. He did not foilow them. He could

--' to them when they were at a distance of 10 to feet from him and continued to listen till they went at a distance of about 20 feet from that place. He did not even tried to ascertain from them as to ix

--l38---

how they got the knowiedge of conspiracy of murder of Krishnegowda. The said persons proceedezfon park road towards west. The park situate at a distance of 300 m.e,t,ers fr_ori1" "

, Saligrama Road. It is true that a1m.e'spiogeeaeaperg park road towards west, hie"-lgyouldv. goyiniittihetvmidst the village. The house of situate at a distance of half kilon1ete_r road. The house of Sriniyas is.a'i'se::'f3it'u§l'té'2a?:Vdticiistance of haif K.m. from getting the of Krishnegowda withingfivetnii*"nu.tes_on':'iais vehicle. It is true that he knew had telephone facility in his housed. He to book a call to the Saligrama :AFfoli:ce_Vt"St%atV"ion, but, he could not get the line. The li'nes__ ogfteiephone were snapped. Therefore, het""cou--Vl:d"n;ot even contact the K.R. Nagara Poiice It is elicited in his further cross- .' 'ekanaination that if one stands in front of the house Srinivas, the house of Dasharatha is visible. He does not know if the complaint is lodged against them by the wife of Dasharatha for having sustained

--139»~ blows. On the date of the incident, he did not see the wife of Dasharatha at the scene of occurrence. It is true that Dasharatha and his wife areghclose relatives of the accused. He does not accused were staying in the house often. It is true that KrishneJgAowda"'wa's- that day before the incident that:'some_p:eo'pl'e making preparation to as'sa;u!t hin'i...V_"'+;§e 'does not know if I(rishnegow'fday_ hadllllnvoiljoccagsion onﬂvvthat day to go towards the house It is true that on tha~t"'d_ay, igalata "took-w.._rJ__l:-'§ice on the way betweenthew hofusos"of"Dasharatha and Srinivasa. It is not truretioyvsluggestuthat galata was started in front of houlsetvof A:Dasharatha. The witness has .yolunteere;d'*~«that galata started in front of the house of"l.P.uttaVs'wa*rr:ygowda. It is also elicited that it is true reach the house of Krishnegowda, the uh"ligideiceased from the house of Srinivas, there are seyeral routes. It is not true to suggest that late mklrishnegowda and his followers were exhibiting their weapons when they were proceeding from the house of Srinivas. He does not know if

-140--

Krishnegowda and his followers started from the house of Srinivas showing the aggressive attitude. It is not true to suggest that when Krishnegowda left the house of Srinivas, he was noét..__Jwea:r'Vin'gV. panche. It is true that he was at K V' Srinivas, when all of them left'the"house:'of:_'S--rVinivasV;'« It is true that Krishnegowda V4i*e:n1_,oved.g',.'hgi'sv panlchefg and kept the same in his"'s.c'ooter the house of Srinivas. .It..V_iAs true "teh;at°"Krishnegowda left the house holding katii.iAV."i.:nll__his hand. The witness has 'voiunteered th"at_"--Krgigshnegowda was holding kethi'Fretjjhsseesis-defence. It is also elicited that he doues if in the first instance, the caseilwas registe_red against the leaders of Janata D35. is not true to suggest that on the said lea},«klrishnelgjewda left from the house of Srinivas V --V with" ariiaintention to attack the leaders of the Janata it It is not true to suggest that after the informing them that a false case cannot be i "lodged against the leaders of Janata Dal, they had fabricated a false story against the poor accused. He K32?'

----l42--w facts elicited in the cross--examination of this witness that his statement was recorded»-.iafter preparation of the mahazar and he the name of the Police officer, who"re--cord'ed-_th:e'*~ if statement. It is further elicited "ti-vii arrival of the police to their viliagegthat had been lodged againstvj'_i:"'m_aa_y leaders belonging to JanataRfD_al«._ later, he has stated that hea.learnt-~t:hjatlcoimplaivntvhad been filed against acct.-iivsetd siiojnliva:'"'Further, the facts ' elicited in~..theijcross--e')t'am:i'nat:ion would also show that he hacla::qn:i'ttedfthat he is the only person by name Séu§a_yl iv(tiinar'.ank;'a he has not stated before the pol,iceV that aVcc.iised':nos.1 to 5 are poor persons and belong?Vitogvijifianancially backward class and he felt iiitvhihilevV"g'iving"i.statement before the police that muui*dei--4s.""must have been committed at the if"4'"_--,:itistigation and with the conspiracy of Janata Dal

-- iileaidiers. The facts elicited in the cross-examination "would show that having regard to the place at which he was standing at the time of the incident, it is not proved beyond reasonable doubt that he has via

--l43--

witnessed the incident and his evidence cannot be said to be truthful and reliable to be made talaei-biasvis so as to bring home the guilt of having committed the offences. for w'hic'h'_';Vth'eyjeassg""

charged. ' his

98. The facts elicited in the"crossfeMa'rriinati'on"=i of PW.9 - Mangala, wife<:of Ganeshirihas to be' considered along with th'ev_tev_id'e'nce the other witnesses to ran}: out evidence is truthful ar'l'd""i;;.ii.'eiia.b|eg'~."3ai'I'¢7i:Q"*:."is......V:heIPfu! to the prosevcgut-ions; fully supported the case of the prosecutioiniip = has stated in her evidence thatigshe was aloineéiat her house along with her aged husband had been to the lands and been to School. At 12 noon, she heard "Spine gaiata outside and came out. She saw Krishnegowda, Vijayendra, Sujaykumar, 'Siddegowda and Vishwanath were going from the "side of the house of Srinivas towards the house of Puttaswamygowda. Krishnegowda was armed with a chopper and Siddegowda was armed with a sword. xcge { -1444 'Then accused Nos.1 to 4 and 15 were coming towards them. Accused nos.1 to 4 and armed with swords. There was a friction two groups and Siddegowd.a,__ Vijiaiyendra' ,'_'_:an.;V|""

Krishnegowda died in the str'ug(_éi_¥e.iV know the cause of their"id'eaath. .the.V"gA«ai'at.a;; the.' chopper of Krishnegowda:Vwasbroken.'* -T_he.i§accused nos.1 to 4 and Krishnegowda were fighting." iusuccumbed to injuries. ~ ﬁnd. She saw Krishnvegowdra tiie.V'.gr:ound, but, she did not see as.._Ato--. said three persons. Since she has overt act on the part of accused l\Ios".':i.~--.t:o_ 15, she was treated as hostile and be cross-examined by the learned 'i3'l'Qs'e'cutor. It is elicited in her cross- exaéininatioin that it is true that she has stated before :=.,t'iie--._Police that when she came out, she saw accused "lx!:os.i1 to 4 and 15 assaulting Krishnegowda, "--4JV'Viijayendra and Siddegowda with swords and committed murder of those three persons. It is true that in the galata, Vishwanath also sustained 1%, ugxi

-145"

injuries. It is true that after the incident, accused No.2 came back and touched the three dead".hodi«es and confirmed that they were dead out the blood of Krishnegowdafromjlhis"hanidséggtn-dit smeared the same on his c:laeefl§*~and~. went shouting. It is true thatliiiohan'-was_Va»5Vso:._;with; the'-L' group of Krishnegowda. that -at that time, Govindegowda camVe"-.trom-- side. It is true that the4_:raeighib'ou.I's¥ i,V¢;;yere watching the incide.nt§;.». that"Vefiiceptllaccused Nos.1 to 4 and £15, near the scene of accused Nos.1 to 4 and 15 assaulted'.:_'_4 " Siddegowda and Krisjhnegowda»..wi'thA:swords and murdered them. It her earlier statement in chief-

i"'e.xa..n1ina't'ion'§;.'that she did not know the cause of V -V death V'i}ayendra, Siddegowda and Krishnegowda, it saw them only after their death is incorrect. « isielicited in the cross--examination of this witness the learned counsel appearing for the accused that she does not know the name of the witnesses. It is true that they are the people of Krishnegowda. 1%}?

w146- She knows the house of Dasharatha. It is true that the house of Dasharatha is also situate on the:"m'ain road. It is not true to suggest that her situate on the main road. It _is.. not truéto» that she has no records to show h'jei*'3res~id'e_nce house of her father. It':.is~.._true"-that iiie§~-.i._ji1o.i.rse isf' situate in between the of.' Kenwdagannana Krishnegowda and '4i'sV.',i_io:t--..true to suggest that she does_rio__t know started. It is true thag the galata had started._._ not:i<AnowVVi_f::§Krishnegowda and his suppo.rte.rs party and the accused constituted It is true that KrE.s}hne~gowdaahelonged to Congress party. It is true .At:h.=1_t itrfishnegowda passed in front of her house. was accompanied by Sujaya, Vijiaypentdra. Vishwanath, Srinivasa and they were it ho:-ding arms. It is not true to suggest that she did ihnzotﬂcome out immediately when they were passing Win front of her house. It is true that when Krishnegowcla was passing in front of her house, galata had begun and after she came out, she saw biii W147- the galata. When she saw the galata, the other residents of her lane were also watching the gaiata, but, she cannot say their names. It is suggest that she does not know fro.m':"'wh'e're4 accused came to the scene of:;occ:urre'ncef.- that the accused were coming towardsgtiie 'scenje"vof'g occurrence when gaiata wasjgoing true to suggest that whom the galata had' that she saw initial galata and accu'se.d.:V.fcoming there at the time nt:gt"true that the galata was going' o.n"e\fie:nr i§e'for'e the accused arriving at the scene. '.T._t"is inrtherj};-léicited that it is not true to suggeVst~ thatlit-hemgaiata did not take place right in rfront of«.her~--.house. Ordinariiy, Krishnegowda was "'n--ot'--..hol'diVi.i*;:g weapons whenever he used to walk .v in frqnr of her hpuse. It is true that ordinarily, i:}.,Kr'ls.hne'gowda used to wear panche. It is true that onithat day, Krishnegowda was wearing a knicker "and was holding a chopper in his hand. It is true that by the time she saw the galata, the chopper of Krishnegowda had broken. It is true that the

-2.

~148~« broken piece of the chopper was still in the hand of Krishnegowda. It is not true to sugg_est:f,that Krishnegowda was moving forward chopper only. She has__o...again_V'"'sta'i;ed= Krishnegowda was moving foi%wa.frd~'iwiith"th'e piece of chopper in his It true -zitherut"

members of group__of KrAis.h:neg'owda wvvergfi rushing towards the group,Vvvhichi'.wiash them. It is not true to s4uggest:.~th'at'¥th'e_:otheriﬂéfoup coming in front of:__ of oniy five persons. other group, there wereiino-. people. The bank road is situateion_theVV"r_igh_t" of her house and it is in a stra}gigh't dire'ctv--ion_.____It is true that if one stood in front » hervA_h.ou:se,_ the persons moving on the bank road H almostﬁ It is true that people were comingafhrom the side of the bank road. It is true that several. people were coming from the side of the road. It is true that the people rushed from the if "Hillside of the naia and watched the incident. It is true that peopie were coming from the side of the house of Dasharatha also to see the incident. She does not k%'i

-149"

know if the wife of Dasharatha also had sustained injury when she was in her house. It is true.lt!1_d'a«t_ithe accused are reiated to Dasharatha. know if Krishnegowda and_;...hi_$ entered into the house of beaten his wife. She doe-'s....not"vknowAt.hee,,galata~:' started from the side. of oli.D'ais,l3a;.§ntha and it was spreading of Srinivasa.

She does retreating back fronjj-the Votiéasharatha due to such vg.alate...f"' 1'V«:5::h;e if the Janata Dal meetings'wevreftreinvgtheid frequently in the house of Dasharatha. _ the Police did not enquire he.r\%f':.on'~the nd'ate_____of the incident. It is not true to » __she has not witnessed the incident and "sh.e? deposing in support of the story .6 fatiricatedéiiiby the Police.

it It is clear from the evidence of PW.9 -- ivliiaingala that though she has deposed in her itW'examination---in-chief that she had witnessed the incident of accused Nos.1 to 4 and 15 assaulting Krishnegowda, Siddegowda and Vijayendra, she has ' we \..r

-l50--

E further stated that she did not know the cause of their death and she was treated as hostile an'd.Vin_ her crosswexamination by the learned Public__'~'i5!rosec'utr3r_;' she has admitted that she __has' given"::sta'ternVent"

before the Police to the effect fishe- accused Nos.1 to 4 and 1t5_v'as_sautiting _Kfi5.isl1§._n'eg.c*lNda,*V.t' Vijayendra and Sid_degowda:"vwith that her earlier statement.--in__'ii|i}eu""e§§aVh1i_nation-in-chief that she doesriot death, but, she saws. is incorrect.

Further,._ th1e_v""fa-sgts eliciiwted her cross-examination would clearlwf'show"th'at' she was inside the house _ and aftenégalata, she came out of the houise.i'~ The"f4a§:__t_sp.eIicited in her cross-examination iVreferredpp:l:o__ above, would clearly show that if and his supporters were armed with weaponshand known to the people who had gathered tthie.re.fV" Therefore, it is clear that the evidence of this fiiwitness ~-- PW.9 cannot at all be said to be truthful if "and reiiable and cannot be made the basis to bring home the guilt of the accused.

W in-w ' S m151m

100. It is elicited in the cross-examination of PW.10 -~ Janaki, wife of M.D. Venkatesh t'h.3jt_ti_th_e door of her house faces towards south a_nd road. It is true that the houseof,_Srin~itkas'a'fisV"sit'uate "

on Mysore-Saligrama road. it is_"t';rue~_th:a't other side of the SaligraI'h_ar..Mysore road," iinvfront off the house of Sriniyasa, tAthVe're_ '=are..s"ev:era_l§ houses facing towards to reach the Saiigrama main ,_road'," a distance of 50 feet not know as to how the i' true that when she came:\_out,',. iVsihe'j':-saw:'kérisfinegowda armed with the chopperllandt in his ordinary wearing appareis an'd~--..sl1_e,does not know the cause of »t(r-istrunviegowda going in his undergarments and hoiding'u"theA'g:;.c'hopper. It is true that she does not know who dealt with which blow from the other group on the group of Krishnegowda. It is that there was a chopper in the hand of it mllkrishnegowda till he fell on the ground. After seeing the dead body, she was scared and went into her house. It is further elicited in her crosswexamination be -152- that it is not true to suggest that she has not stated before the Police that accused No.1 assaulted Vijayendra with a sword and that she has not stated before the Poiice that accused No.2. facts elicited in the cross-examinatipon..:9'ff_"~§W.ii--l)_if~.. would cleariy show that she her evidence. Her evidence would not.".;i.nspireg"they Court to believe that she h'a:s"lwitne'sse'd:.'the_incident' and wherefore, hfer e\_ridd"e"'n.;ﬁ:ge jfto. theleffect that accused Nos.1 to 4 and caused the murde_r___ Krishnegowda and Siddegowdav tir:je§'~net.jnspate the Court to believe the same a'§.__4 dtafuthflult " reliable. Therefore, her ev..Eclen'ce is u'a'l-so not helpful in proving the guilt of » Vaccu __ 1':0.1'.'";In view of the above said reasoning, it is .c,:'c!e.arv'that on re--appreciation of the evidence of to 6 and 9 and 10, the evidence of these V' "witnesses is not helpful to the prosecution to bring home the guilt of the accused and the prosecution is left with the evidence of recovery made on the basis

-153»--»--

of the statements of the accused and also the contents of serology report and Forensic Science Laboratory report.

102. It is clear from the mate.r.i.au_l"vV.on::record.. that according to the evideinceyof. witnesses examined onV.h.ehalf"._of the"'VpVros'eci;:tion:"', that all the five accused i.el';',.._accused. 4 and 15 threw the wearglonsTin}.,tlh-«ew.ych.annelH and went away. However, a_c_co.rd.»ilng:» investigation officer, there were 'two_recoveries-----made. As spoken to by',PWs.6'9'j'a:ndgy"7.£§;'*-.on'e recovery was made at BettiganahalyliVfanwdl rainother recovery was made at Hosjaho~!alu xv'i!.!ag'e,_ K.R. pet Taluk. According to days after the incident i.e., on he had gone to Bettiganahalli viliuagér_._ "five swords were found lying on the road if side and the same were seized under the mahazar - However, he has not stated that the said if Wswords were seized on the basis of the voluntary statement given by the accused and the said five swords were located at different places in »-154M Bettaganahalli village. Further, the evidence of pw.7o would show that according to him, _4ac:cus~e_d No.2 gave voluntary statement and K.R. Pet and took out the blooc_Ista4ine_d' l"

the bush by the side of the Vi~pa;1'.-7 clear that in view of theut"

evidence of PWs.4, 559 and..lp?€l), the pr¢tset,.rl:aon has not been able to prove.recoivery-'polity'weapons on the basis of the £\£o.2. In view of has not proved that the_ Viévolunta ry statements and led "police and produced the weapons*,4_'_which: used in the commission of the4}goff'ence.V" " view of the evidence of the eye- that he saw accused Nos.1 to 5 weapons in the channel while they were pjjocheeding towards channel after committing titeoffence, the question of recovery of weapons on ttghewbasis of the voluntary statement of the accused VVwNo.2 from Bettiganahaili and hosaholalu village at K.R. pet, would not arise. Further, in the absence of the proof of recovery of weapons on the basis of the we

6. «~157- and pass the following Order:--

The appeal is dismissed. The acquittal of the accused Nos.1; .t.o__4, respondents herein passed ii';

the file of the III Additioh_a"l...Sessio:ns ;ua§«lg;h--M.ysore,=wl' dated 27.02.2001 is__confiIAfr:.'ll:VVtV;A'c!., xuaqe Sd/-_§L_ Judge

Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court

State Of Karnataka vs Kali @ Siddegowda on 31 August, 2010

Bench: V.G.Sabhahit, S.N.Satyanarayana