Karnataka High Court
Mallappa vs The State Of Karnataka on 30 November, 2010
Bench: K.L.Manjunath, B.Manohar
M.
SIDDAPPA
Ag€:34
8/ Q AMRLETHRAO
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
OCCAGRICULTURE
SRINIVAS
Age:2 1
8/ O GANAPATHI
AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS
OCC:S'I'UDENT ' «.
APPA RAG '
Age:56
S / O MANIK RAD "
AGED ABOUT E-'E1;:_§;DRS_;..__
OCC:AGRICU.LTU:;§§E A
BAPU RAD A'
Age:65 '
S/O MAI)?/21?4'1?l/>ai?>15:IV'1i.Q'
AGED ABOUT 65. YEARS
Dcc,*.;§GR1CU1,*rI;RE V
. .. APPELLANTS
(By'S.{i:.V DB1: §v:DD'DAF:pA, ADV. A--1 TO A8, A-11. A~12 AND
E.
STATE OF KARNATAKA
14; SRL RAHUiD;v»LR,;_aSTURE, ADV. FOR A9. A40, A13) 3
, "I7HP.Q:UGH POLICE, KUSHNUR TALUK AURAD«B
BANCzALORE~O 1
REPRE:SEN'FED BY THE STATE PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR HIGH CQURT BUILDINGS
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
RESPONDENT
(By SE\:'i'i': ANURADHA MIDESAL ADDL. SP?)
<32"
THE: APPEAL COEVHNG ON FGR HEARING '§HES EBAY.
MA1'*3J UNAVFH J , DELEXHERED THE F{)Ee,Ee,C)'v§?1NG:
JUDGMENT
The zxppellzmts have preferred this 21p;3ea1.~33ei:i':.g 2:.g§griexred.V by the Judgment of eonvicttion g:.;ad,n:{j::--r X{)eI'- di.29.6.2OCV.7 passed by the Fast Tfaek Case No.47/2006 C()H\7iCfiI?g effence punishable u / S 143$ 147, and 307' r/W See. 149 IPC and awarfiiipg oif impr:s0r1men€; for life for the a._x';c§f e'r1:<§f>:i9evV'pariicularly fer life for the 0ffen(:e~--u pay fine and in default to undergo fixrther ' '
2. Itégis the flfie iaroseeution that on 2?.3.2005 at abauf «I380 the accused who are the viiiagers of T}hupa::§§_;2}'1z{gé::;:1 as membere of uxfiawful assembéy with ee.ffi:13én object £0 assault the eompiainant
4. ._C?i3;:1Vd1"2t;§§e1nih and his brotherss and in furthera1'1<te of the same '*.'*..;2a:<:i:_:se--§3£ N<>f? Shivakumar and E1C(,':€1S€d N03 R'c1}:kE,EfY1Eif eaughé:
Chandrakarfiih and A4 Aehok assaulted him en his 5% E é has been examinect as PW~}4i. 'When the tneditftal 1"€(1€}1ffCiy:§_tMf1()X'x7 that ah the injured persons had eonstzrned ai«:#<>hoi._é_:ntd-"thézfzg there was a quarrel in the Ladha village in e<):'1:1V<;::;Atiionwith the ' election, the accused persons have been wrongly '1iAn:.pi'i--<;:1t/edJih the ease, In the eireurnstsanees, he _requests. the pCo.Ltnft to ::.eqn§t'g the accused persons. He further eohte:m:ts that {hf} ease of the prosecution that at thefh's.t instantce avn~-.;1tten1pttVAxvas made by the accused persons to the-"n1:)eiesty' of the wife of the complainant, S1h4tL"g}2enu1iiabat"'Vwho'has....heen examined as PW~}5 and whehp 'herself, the accused persons assziifltediiivry which has been witnessed byivvtmorte of the village. He further contends then, Vettnesses said to have seen the 2113{ége.(;t hetve not'--~s~n"pported the ease of the prosecution. Thefefoie; upon the self-serving testimony of the 33¢"
tt'e.o»1np1ain2;nt ands' 1-phtis brothers who are i§1iH}i{Z£li%t,()\&f&1FdS the '«--éie-o.I;sed pefsons, the tria} eourt has wmngiy eonvieted the 'aee.nVseo';_ 4"'ATE'herefore, he eontends that the prosecution :§r:*ong1y? eonvieted the accused. '1'hereforet he eontends that the T'.._prosVe<;:ution has failed to hnngg' home the gt/ziit, of the aectnsed C3 "'»' ,,
3.".
persens. In the CiZ'CU;mS}E8.I}C€'S§ he requests the eeurtvV~t_e-.._ai.1~§_ew the appeai.
10* Per centre, the learned the Triai eeurt has properly appreeiateu'._th'e_zevid.eheev the prosecution has proved the the aii' reasonable doubts and thatvjzust he.e;atus:e eye Wituwesses have not supported the case of he a ground to acquit the aeeuseci V"th;eVV""evidence of the injured pefsons accused. In the Circumstances';'heTteit;uests confirm the Judgment by dismissingzthe 4'apv}j:'e;5:l'';.. % V' H
11. Hfavihg he-e,A:fei"'the' eeunsel for the parties, the only pduit by us in this appeal is whether the the guilt of the accused beyond all it 'Vv._teetsonabA1e.__d0ubtieihd whether the Judgment of conviction and sehtevntee passed by the Sessions court requires to be é eeufirined. Qt' set aside, 9?;
$5 perverse. Aeeerelingly, We held that th~er'e-is a-'_4dellaylI.i4nll'lac§gih.g the Complaint.
13. Be that as it may, let us let in by the prosecution to show xvhethiergthge hasproved the guilt of the accused It is the ease of the cernplainagn-t 5.00 p.m. in the evening he l7'W~ll Kupinder , PW~ 12 PW~8 Udaya singh in his newly constructe.:;lVl;oeisell were all sitting at his house tmljaayre to them, PX/V~l5 Renukabai was them in the old house which is situated 5 E3 hleuusle from the newly constructed house. At that of tirrre, the accused persons being a members of "'----lti11léte{ft1_l_txssembly trespassecl into the house of Renukabai, "jivh.elrge__she was preparing the feed and dragged her out of the lllkfighetise using' abusive or filthy language to show the injured Jperson ~eernplainant and tried to outrage her modesty. In order to rescue herself she started running towards the house sf ene Neelkanth. Oh seeing this incident, the irtjureel persons alse 5v ta went behind Renniiahait when they were near the house of ghee"? "°"'""' Neeiakanth, the accused persons assaulted, The oveifiact of each of the accused has been expiained by us in the. of this Judgment, Therefore, we are of the necessity to repeat the overtact aiiegpedihyjj, t'he:4AAcon:piVainant against each of the accused.
14: On account of the by thecohipiainant, and his brothers and also Singh they were shifted by the been examined as PW7, to the =P\V»9 complainant; he was to give statement immediateiyyxi'«'i%q4;ordin$:,i:Vtoi"'Eitef;i;.t;abai, PVW15 and PW~11 and PW~12, did 'ha complaint on the ground that PW9 a complaint iater. The Doctor who has-i'_'oeen:"'e.§§a%ni1ied as i3W~i<'ii has cieariy stated that PW~9 was conscioufsivshen he was brought to the hospital, Therefore, ofthe prosecution that PW--9 was unconscious and Ipcotlldiiizioitiiiodge the complaint immediately cannot be heiieved. 6»! If-\<E(i€L)FdiI1§;1:y1 xw hold E3121: '(E16 J11{i;§H"r€f§1T of <:<>:'1vi<V:'ié<m azld order of sentence as bad in law and are Babies K) be s~:.<31 é1SSid(?.
16. In the result, the appeal ailowexi. (:<>I1ViCt;ior1 emd order of sentemte p213:-3:~5»«;_:d' by' {fiefE'a..é§t _"7f1*23(:K» Court, Bid-an dt.29'h June 2007 in Set aside, The accuséd are set a.t_ 'iib€rt;\"/..__Bag} "if any} exectuted by the accused pérsonsg""'sh_::E1 "n.st/anci'"c2113Ce11ed. The amount, if any, paid by the petrsons towards fine is ordered to be'r'§:fi1ndéé:d.§