Karnataka High Court
Ramesh Purdappa Ambannavar And Others vs State By Dharwad Police on 17 September, 1998
Equivalent citations: 1999(1)ALD(CRI)92, ILR1998KAR3918, 1998(6)KARLJ256
Author: B. Padmaraj
Bench: B. Padmaraj
JUDGMENT Chidananda Ullal, J.
1. These two appeals are interconnected since they are directed against the common judgment and order of conviction dated 9-7-1997 in S.C. No. 75 of 1993 passed by the II Additional Sessions Judge, Dharwad, henceforth in brief referred as 'Sessions Judge'. When the first appeal is filed by the accused Nos. 1 and 2, the second appeal is filed by the accused No. 3. In passing the impugned judgment and order of conviction, the learned Sessions Judge had sentenced all the accused persons for the offences under Sections 323, 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC. While so doing, the learned Sessions Judge had awarded R.I. for three months for the offence under Section 323 of the IPC and further awarded imprisonment for life and further slapped a fine of Rs. 2,000/- each and in default to pay the sum, all of them were directed to undergo R.I. for a further period of 4 months.
2. We heard the learned Counsel for the appellants in the first appeal Sri S.P. Kulkarni and the learned Counsel for the appellant in the second appeal Sri M.N. Gadag. We also heard the learned State Public Prosecutor, Sri B.R. Nanjundaiah appearing for the respondent-State in both the appeals. We also perused the case records and further perused the records of the Sessions Judge, in S.C. No. 75 of 1993.
3. Facts in brief are as hereunder:
That at about 8.30 a.m. on 1-8-1992, the PSI, Dharwad Rural Police Station-P.W. 3 while in his Police Station received information by an anonymous phone call to the effect that, on Aminabhavi Road, at a distance of about a K.M. away from Dharwad, a dead body of a male person was lying in front of a lorry bearing Registration No. AIK 3949 facing towards Aminabhavi village and that there were injuries over the dead body, suspected to have been caused by sharp weapon and that the clothes over the dead body were bloodstained and further that there were bloodstains in the cabin of the lorry too. The PSI thereafter visited the spot and he suspected the same to be a case of murder and accordingly prepared a report on the spot and sent the same to his Police Station through P.C. No. 749 for the purpose of registration of the case. He had also pressed into service the dog suqad and further sent requisition for finger print expert-P.W. 6 to visit the scene of offence. He had also conducted inquest-Ex. P. 5 over the dead body of the deceased and he sent the same for post-mortem examination to the Civil Hospital, Dharwad through P.C. No. 2202. That, thereafter, P.W. 15-the CPI and the I.O. had reached the spot and he took over the investigation from P.W. 3, the PSI. That on the strength of the report given by P.W. 3, a case in Crime No. 152 of 1992 was registered by the Dharwad Rural Police for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC and the FIR was submitted to the jurisdictional Magistrate. That during the course of investigation, the Police secured a chit relating to Hindustan Transport, Hubli and on that basis they made a telephone call to that Company and on enquiry they came to know that the cleaner of the lorry by name Venkateshwar Rao-P.W. 14 was also very much available in the said Lorry Office. The Police thereafter secured P.W. 14 and recorded his statement and took up further investigation in the matter. During the course of investigation, P.W. 14 had given the history that the deceased was his driver by name Sathyanarayana Rao and when the lorry No. AIK 3949 driven by him in the presence of P.W. 14 in the said lorry, he being the cleaner of the lorry, three persons (latter turned to be the appellants-accused persons) had entered into the lorry at Kittur Circle near Dharwad and posed themselves as genuine passengers to go over to Hubli and that after getting into the lorry, when one of the accused persons had placed himself in the rear side of the driver, the other two accused persons placed themselves, one by the side of P.W. 14 in the cabin, and another in front of him. After the lorry had travelled for some distance, all the accused persons stopped the lorry on the pretext that they wanted to get down from the lorry as the village where they had their work to attend to had been reached. That the deceased driver had stopped the lorry and P.W. 14 opened the left side cabin door of the lorry. That, then the accused who was sitting in the rear side of the driver threw chilli powder on the eyes of the deceased driver and at that, the accused person who was sitting with P.W. 14 cleaner assaulted him i.e. P.W. 14. Thereafter, P.W. 14 jumped out of the lorry and ran away. That thereafter he had gone for quarter of a K.M. and having found a Government bus, P.W. 14 gave signal to stop the same and accordingly having found the driver of the said bus stopping the bus, P.W. 14 started narrating in Hindi language what had come on him and that the driver of the Government bus since was not knowing Hindi language, he could not understand what P.W. 14 was narrating all about and therefore the driver of the Government bus had his way. In the meantime, P.W. 14 had also noticed their lorry being driven towards Hubli side.
4. Thereafter, he ran to a nearby factory by name, 'Air Tech' on the National Highway and contacted P.W. 2, an engineer working in the said factory through the watchman of that factory and he explained all about the incident to P.W. 2. That P.W. 2 having found P.W. 14 panicky treated him well by offering water and a cup of tea and on advice of P.W. 2 by means of a truck, P.W. 14 reached Hindustan Motors at Hubli at about 9 a.m. on the following morning. That in the meantime, P.W. 3 had contacted the said Transport Office, when P.W. 14 was present there. Thereafter, P.W. 14 was taken to the Police Station by the person in charge of the said Transport Office and the Police had taken the statement of P.W. 14 and in the said statement, P.W. 14 had given the history of the incident. That Finger Print Expert P.W. 6 having visited the spot at the instance of P.W. 3 and having found the bloodstain finger print on the left side cabin door of the lorry, got the said door of the lorry cabin, M.O. 1 removed through the Investigating Officer. P.W. 6 thereafter took possession of the door of the truck or lorry M.O. 1. He having collected M.O. 1, through a photographer got the photographs of the finger prints found on M.O. 1 and further enlarged the same as at Exs. P. 8 and P. 9 (Ex. 8a and 8b are the enlarged photographs, whereas Ex. 10 was the normal size photograph). P.W. 6 had also received the finger prints of the accused, P.W. 14 and the deceased and on his examination, he found that the blood finger print on M.O. 1 tallied with the finger print of the accused No. 3 and accordingly, P.W. 6 had given his opinion as at Ex, P. 15. He had also issued Ex. P. 7 certificate to the effect that he found a chance finger print on M.O. 1.
5. When the matter was resting at that, at about 10 p.m. on 7-10-1992, when the Special Crime Squad to prevent and also to detect crimes that were taking place in Hubli City, headed by P.W. 16-CPI, was on patrol, P.W. 16 found the above three persons together in a group with yet another person by name Basavaraj Eilebal at Pinto Cross at Hubli. All the said persons having found the tempo of P.W. 16, were seen frightened and one of them removed the wrist watch and kept the same in his pocket and on suspicion, the above three accused persons and their associate were apprehended by P.W. 16. It is further stated that the said persons did not give proper explanation to P.W. 16 and on suspicion, all of them were arrested by him. On search of the person of A1, chilly powder packet was found in his pant pocket. That, A1 was having Rs. 50/- in his pocket, whereas, A2 had Rs. 20/- and a button knife in his pocket. That A3 had a handbag made out of cloth and the same was containing rope pieces measuring about 6 feet and 8 feet.
That, a detailed mahazar was drawn for the seizure from A1 to A3 as at Ex. P. 26. That the finger prints of the accused Nos. 1 to 3 were also subsequently taken by P.W. 16 during search and were sent to P.W. 6 for cross-checking as to whether the finger prints on M.O. 1 in any way tally with the finger prints of any of the above accused persons.
6. That P.W. 15, the Investigating Officer of the case had also arranged for test identification parade through P.W. 11, the Tahsildar and the Taluka Magistrate on 17-10-1992 and P.W. 11 accordingly held the same in his Court as per the test identification parade proceedings, copy at Exs. P. 19 to P. 24. That P.W. 14 in the said test identification parade had identified the above accused persons. P.W. 14 had given further statement to the Police from his side and in the said statement P.W. 14 had stated that the deceased driver had Rs. 12,400/- in the cabin box and that the same was found to be missing. It is to be noted here that P.W. 16 who arrested the accused persons along with their associate by name Basavaraj Eilebal had nothing to do with the original crime registered against the appellants-accused persons by P.W. 3 as stated above, as their arrest by P.W. 16 was by chance during the course of his patrol duty in Hubli city.
7. That on completion of investigation in the case, P.W. 15 the I.O. filed a charge-sheet as against the above accused persons for the offences under Sections 394, 323, 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC.
8. All the accused persons had in their trial before the learned Sessions Judge pleaded 'not guilty' of the offences and the prosecution thereafter to sustain the charge had examined in all 16 witnesses and among them, the material witnesses are P.W. 1-Dr. Nagaraj Rao, P.W. 2-Girish Ramachandra Bagi, P.W. 3-Narayan Devaray Bine, P.W. 6-Ashok Mahadev Kulkarni, the Police Inspector and Finger Print Expert, P.W. 1-Bhimrao H. Shinde, the Taluk Executive Magistrate who had conducted the test identification parade, P.W. 12-Vinayakarao Subbarao Savarkar, a clerk of the owner of the lorry, P.W. 14-the cleaner and the eye-witness, P.W. 15-the CPI and the Investigating Officer in the case and P.W. 16-the Inspector-in-charge of the Special Patrol Duty, who had arrested the accused persons along with yet another person by name Basavaraj Bilebal on 7-10-1992 at Pinto cross at Hubli.
9. The prosecution had further produced 28 documents and among them are Ex. P. 1-post mortem report, Ex. P. 2-opinion of the doctor, Ex. P. 4-complaint, Ex. P. 5-Inquest panchanama, Ex. P. 6-spot pancha-nama, Ex. P. 7-certificate issued by P.W. 6-the Police Inspector and Finger Print Expert, Exs. P. 8 and P. 9-enlarged photographs of the finger prints, Exs. 8a and 8b-ehlarged photographs, Ex. P. 10-normal size photograph, Ex. P. 12-the finger prints of P.W. 14, Ex. P.13-the finger prints of the deceased, Ex. P. 14-finger prints of the appellant-accused No. 3 taken at the time of search, Ex. P. 15-opinion given by P.W. 6, Ex. P. 24-the proceedings of the test identification parade, Ex. P. 25-the seizure panchanama of clothes of the deceased and Ex. P. 27-the complaint lodged by P.W. 16 in Cr. No. 284 of 1997; furthermore, the prosecution had also produced 13 material objects and they include M.O. 1-door of cabin of the lorry or truck, M.O. 2-knife, M.Os. 3 and 4-bloodstained earth and unstained earth, M.Os. 7 to 9-clothes of the deceased and M.O. 10-chilly powder seized from the appellant-accused No. 1 by P.W. 16.
10. The learned Sessions Judge on appreciation of the material evidence produced by the prosecution before him had passed the impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence as against the appellants-accused persons for the offences under Sections 323, 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC as he did not find any evidence for the charge under Section 394 of the IPC as against the accused persons.
11. Having been aggrieved with the same, the appellants-accused persons are before us by way of two appeals. When the first appeal is by the accused Nos. 1 and 2, the second appeal is by the accused No. 3 as stated above.
12. The learned Counsel for the appellant-accused No. 3 in the second appeal, Sri M.N. Gadag preferred to place his argument first and he had argued on the following points:
(i) That, the instant case, the prosecution had to prove its case only by of circumstantial evidence as P.W. 14-the cleaner of the lorry could not identify the accused persons as the accused persons were stated to have entered the truck of the deceased at about 11 p.m. and forced him out of the lorry and further seized the lorry and the deceased lorry driver.
(ii) That, the test identification parade to identify the accused persons was a must. But the test identification parade held by P.W. 11 in the instant case as per test indentification parade proceedings at Exs. P. 19 to P. 24 were totally vitiated.
13. To elaborate the above two points, Sri Gadag had argued that in the instant case in hand, the case of the prosecution is that the accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3 in the case had shown their hands to the deceased lorry driver to stop the vehicle and further to give a lift to them to Hubli by payment of fare of Rs. 5/- each and that the deceased driver accordingly stopped the vehicle and got the accused persons inside their lorry. That, according to P.W. 14, it was at a place called Kittur Circle near Dharwad and it was dead of night as it was about 11 p.m. According to Sri Gadag, it is obvious that there was no occasion for P.W. 14 to witness either the faces of the accused persons or for that matter, their featural appearances. In this context, he had drawn our attention to the further case of the prosecution that the accused persons after travelling to some distance, demanded the deceased lorry driver to stop the truck on the plea that they have got some job to be attended to in that place and therefore they desired to alight from the lorry and further that there ensued the throwing of the chilly powder on the face of the deceased lorry driver by one of the accused persons sitting in the rear side of the driver and further an altercation at the first instance between one of the accused persons and P.W. 14 and that, immediately thereafter, P.W. 14 ran in front of the lorry and if that was the situation, according to Mr. Gadag, it was not at all possible for P.W. 14 in any way to see them to be identified later and that, that being the case of the prosecution, it is obvious that the prosecution had to hold a test identification parade for the identification of the accused persons by P.W. 14. It was further argued by Mr. Gadag that though the prosecution did hold such a test identification parade through P.W. 11, the same was totally vitiated, for the reason that P.W. 14 was brought to the Police Station a day earlier to the day of the alleged test identification parade and that the Police had tutored P.W. 14 well by showing print photos of the accused that appeared in two leading Kannada dailies published from Hubli on the day next of their arrest i.e., on 8-10-1992 marked in the defence as Ex. D. 1 and Ex. D. 2. In this regard, Sri Gadag had also submitted that the print photos of those accused persons together with other accused persons in connection with some other cases were all published in leading Kannada dailies by name 'Sanje Vani' and 'Samyuktha Karnataka' published from Hubli and it is those photographs the Police had shown to P.W. 14 and in the said circumstances, he had argued vehemently that the test identification parade held by P.W. 11 was totally vitiated and therefore, the same is of no help to the prosecution.
14. In furtherance of his argument, Sri Gadag also submitted that when the accused persons were not properly identified by P.W. 14, question of their being convicted by the learned Sessions Judge in the case did not arise at all. Therefore he prayed that the impugned judgment and order of conviction in so far as the same related to the accused No. 3 is concerned be set aside.
15. Now we turn to the argument advanced by Sri S.P. Kulkarni, appearing for the appellants-accused Nos. 1 and 2 in the first appeal. To start with, Sri Kulkarni submitted that he would adopt the above argument of Sri Gadag in so far as the points that the Test Identification Parade held by P.W. 11 was vitiated and further that his clients too had not been identified by P.W. 14 and therefore, question of finding them guilty by the learned Sessions Judge was also not equally an error on his part.
16. While turning to the offence punishable under Section 394 of the IPC as against the appellants-accused persons, Sri Kulkarni argued that there was no worth incriminating material evidence by the prosecution before the learned Sessions Judge that the appellants were guilty of the offence under Section 394 and according to him, therefore the prosecution had miserably failed to prove the very motive for the offence. That being so, according to Sri Kulkarni, an important circumstance in the chain in the entire event was virtually missing. Hence, while endorsing the finding of the learned Sessions Judge in the impugned judgment that the prosecution did not prove the said part of charge as against the accused persons, he also advanced an argument that even the charges under Sections 302, 323 read with Section 34 also could not stand on better footing, for according to him, even for the said charges, there was no worth evidence adduced by the prosecution before the learned Sessions Judge.
17. The next point argued by on Kulkarni was that M.O. 2-knife that was stated to have been used for the purpose of committing the offence by the respondents-accused persons was not proved to be recovered from the accused No. 2 before the learned Sessions Judge, for the very seizure of M.O. 2 was not proved by the prosecution as the mahazar witness had turned hostile. Therefore, according to him, there was no foundation at all for the prosecution case that his clients and the appellant-accused No. 3 in the second appeal murdered the deceased driver of the lorry during the course of committing the offence under Section 394. In this context, Sri Kulkarni pointed out that the witnesses for Inquest Mahazar Ex. P. 5 and spot panchanama-Ex. P. 6 and further P.W. 7 a witness for the seizure mahazar of Ex. P. 16 for seizure of M.Os. including M.O. 2- knife had turned hostile.
18. Sri Kulkarni had also found fault with the inordinate delay in filing the complaint in the instant case. In this regard, it was argued by him that if it is true that P.W. 14 was made to get down from the truck and made to run away, nothing prevented him to lodge a complaint before the Police any time between 11 p.m. on 31-7-1992 to 9 a.m. on the day following i.e., 1-8-1992, for according to P.W. 14, he was made to go out of the truck and further made to run away from the scene at 11 p.m. on 31-7-1992 and that he had reached Hindustan Transport, Hubli at 9 a.m. on the following morning. It was also argued by him that ultimately it is not P.W. 14 who had lodged the complaint before the Police, but it was lodged none other than by P.W. 3 the PSI of the Dharwad Rural Police Station on reaching the scene of offence, 1 K.M. away from Dharwad, at a village called 'Amminabhavi'. Hence, according to Sri Kulkarni, there is no proper explanation by the prosecution as to why there was inordinate delay of nearly 12 hours in registering the case and further issuing Ex. P. 13 the FIR. In this regard, it is forcefully argued by him that the said inordinate delay is fatal to the case of the prosecution and on that score alone, the prosecution case is liable to be thrown out and that the learned Sessions Judge totally failed to appreciate that aspect of the case at all.
19. Sri Kulkarni next took up the alleged voluntary statement stated to have been made by the accused persons before the Police and that it was in consequence thereof, the Police have seized M.O. 2-knife. In this regard, the submission made by Sri Kulkarni was that no voluntary statement had been proved by the prosecution as it would have normally been proved as any other fact, as held by the Division Bench of this Court in a reported case of R.Vijayakumar v State by Mahadevapura Policy Bangalore.
20. To sum up his arguments, Sri Kulkarni also argued that when the instant case had to be proved only by circumstantial evidence, every link of the chain of circumstances had to be proved by the prosecution and with regard to the case in hand, he submitted that there are good number of links missing in the entire chain of circumstances. That being the position in the case, he finally submitted that his clients are entitled to for an honourable acquittal in the hands of this Court either for want of sufficiency of evidence for the charges or by extending the benefit of doubt to them.
21. Sri Kulkarni, in support of his argument had cited the following decisions:
1. R. Vijayakumar's case, supra .
2.Amirali Ismail Panjiwani and Others v K.C. Lahiri and Another.
3. Fellix Joannas v State of Karnataka.
4. Ramesh Chand v State of Uttar Pradesh.
5. Subash and Shiv Shankar v State of Uttar Pradesh.
6. Kishore Chand v State of Himachal Pradesh.
7. Inderjit Singh and Another v State of Punjab.
8. Bhagwan Dass v State of Haryana.
9. Kamal Murmu and Another v State of West Bengal.
10. R. Rajendran Nair v State of Kerala.
11. Banifas Samad v State.
12. Shivappa v State of Karnataka.
13.Hargovandas Devrajbhai Patel and Others v State of Gujarat.
14.Kanu Ambu Vish v State of Maharashtra.
15.Laxmipat Choraria and Others v State of Maharashtra.
22. On the other side, the learned State Public Prosecutor, Sri Nan-jundaiah argued at the outset that there is no merit in either of the appeals preferred by the two sets of accused persons. According to him, the prosecution had proved the case in so far as the same related to the offences under Section 323 and 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC charged against the appellants-accused persons. However, he had fairly conceded that the prosecution could not prove the case against the appellants-accused persons for the offence under Section 394 of the IPC. It was also argued by him that though the prosecution had to prove the case only on circumstantial evidence, they had proved almost every circumstance in the case. According to the learned State Public Prosecutor, the circumstances are as hereunder:
(i) That, the deceased driver and P.W. 14, the cleaner of the lorry were travelling from Belgaum to reach Hubli on 31-7-1992, and when they reached a place called Kittur Circle nearer to Dharwad (before reaching Dharwad) at about 11 p.m., all the appellants-accused persons entered the lorry, presenting to the deceased that they were genuine passengers travelling to Hubli and it is thus they got into the lorry.
(ii) That, soon after that; when the lorry was in motion, all of them wanted the lorry to be stopped on the pretext that they had some work right at that spot and therefore, they wanted to get down from the lorry.
(iii) That, immediately, one of them threw chilly powder on the eyes of the deceased driver and one of them assaulted P.W. 14, who being frightened, alighted from the lorry and ran away from the spot to save himself.
(iv) That, the deceased driver was found alive in the company of the appellants-accused persons in the lorry by the P.W. 14, the lorry cleaner and that on the following morning, P.W. 3, the PSI of Dharwad Rural Police Station found the lorry abandoned at a place called Amminabhavi village and he further found the dead body of the driver Satyanarayana Rao right in front of the lorry at that place.
(v) That, the chance blood finger print of left ring finger of the appellant-accused No. 3 in the second appeal was found on the outer cabin door of the lorry M.O. 1 and that the said chance blood finger print was tallied to the left ring finger print of the appellant-accused No. 3 in the hands of P.W, 6-the finger print expert, during the course of his examination.
(vi) That, about two months thereafter, on 7-10-1992 at Pinto cross, Hubli, within the limits of Hubli sub-urban Police Station, the appellants-accused persons were found in the company of yet another person by name Basavaraj Bilebal, when P.W, 16 the Police Inspector of the Special Crime Squad to prevent and to detect the crimes in Hubli city, was on duty and that on search, in the pocket of the appellant-accused No. 1 in the first appeal, M.O. 10-chilly powder was found.
23. The learned State Public Prosecutor while adverting to the above circumstances had also taken us through the material evidence on record proving the above circumstances.
24. While answering the argument of the other side that the test identification parade held by P.W. 11-the Tahsildar and Taluka Magistrate was vitiated for the reason that P.W. 14 was brought to the Police Station a day in advance and that he was tutored by the Police by showing the print photographs in two Kannada dailies by name 'Samyuktha Karnataka1 and 'Sanje Vani' dated 9-10-1992 published from Hubli, marked as Exs. D. 1 and D. 2 respectively in the defence of the accused persons, it was argued by Sri Nanjundaiah that the said Kannada dailies were naturally being published from Hubli and they had no circulation in the place of P.W. 14 and even if it was true, it was too remote a chance that the Police had also the said print photographs of the appellants-accused persons to be shown to P.W. 14, and therefore according to him the same could not be a ground to argue that the very test identification parade proceedings Exs. P. 19 to P. 24 held by P.W. 11 had vitiated on that count. In furtherance of that argument, it was also submitted by Sri Nanjundaiah that in the facts and circumstances of the case, it was not at all necessary for the prosecution to hold the test identification parade proceedings for the simple reason that P.W. 14 had good number of occasions to see the appellants-accused persons in the cabin quite sometime as they had travelled from Kittur circle to the place where he was forced out of the lorry and he had good number of occasions to see the appellants-accused persons, for it had appeared in the evidence that when the deceased driver stopped the lorry, P.W. 14 was very much inside the lorry as the cleaner and he had witnessed their faces and facial features with the aid of the flash lights occurring from the opposite direction when they entered the lorry and furthermore, the appellants-accused persons were seen at close distance when one of the appellants-accused persons assaulted P.W. 14 and forced him to alight from the lorry and therefore, according to the learned State Public Prosecutor, the test identification parade proceedings-Ex. P. 19 to Ex. P. 24 was conducted only to lend general corroboration of the case of the prosecution. It is also his submission in this regard that P.W. 11 had conducted the test identification parade proceedings in consonance with law and as such, there was nothing for the other side to complain against and therefore, he submitted that there is no worthy merit in the said argument of the learned Counsel appearing for the other side. In that regard, Sri Nanjundaiah had also taken us through the evidence of P.W. 11, wherein it was clearly deposed by him that, on requisition from the CPI, Dharwad, he had conducted the Test Identification Parade proceedings on 20-10-1992 at 3.00 p.m. and earlier on 17-10-1992 he had sent the requisition to the Jurisdictional Magistrate to direct the Jail Authorities to produce the appellants-accused persons at about 3.00 p.m. on 20-10-1992 and that on their production he conducted the Test Identification Parade and at that time at the instance of P.W. 11, P.W. 14 was also kept present on the above date and time by the Dharwad Rural Police Station. It was further deposed by P.W. 11 in his evidence that he kept the respondents-accused persons and P.W. 14 in two separate rooms and he secured 3 sets of 10 different persons for the purpose of Test Identification Parade in respect of three accused persons, and that P.W. 11 on two different occasions placed individual accused persons in different positions with three different sets of 10 persons he had secured for the purpose and got the individual accused persons identified by P.W. 14 on being called separately on every occasion, in all six (twice for 3 different parades) from the room. From the Test Identification Parade proceedings at Exs. P. 19 to 24 it is also clear that P.W. 11 had conducted parades twice in respect of three individual Test Identification Parades by placing the three accused persons individually on every occasion in different positions among 3 sets of 10 different persons and that on all the six occasions (two identification parades for 3 individual accused persons placing them in different positions among 3 sets of 10 different persons-in all 30 persons) P.W. 14 had rightly identified the appellants-aceused persons. It is also in the evidence of P.W. 11 that he had drawn test identification parade proceedings in Kannada Language as per Exs. P. 19 to 24, but getting the same told in the language of P.W. 14 as he was from Andhra Pradesh knowing Telugu language and further that he had taken signatures of P.W. 14 thereon and further affixed his signature thereon on all the six occasions. Therefore, according to the learned State Public Prosecutor, there was nothing for the appellants-accused persons to complain against with regard to the test identification parade proceedings conducted by P.W. 11.
25. While dealing with the point of delay in lodging the complaint very much raised by the learned Counsel for the appellants in the first appeal, it was argued by Sri Nanjundaiah that the FIR came to be registered naturally by P.W. 3 when he was informed over phone by some third parties that the dead body of the deceased was found on the road in front of a lorry at Amminabhavi village and it is thereafter, P.W. 3 had made an entry in Station House Diary-Ex. P. 3 as at Ex. P. 3(a) and thereafter he went to the spot and having found the dead body of the deceased in that position, he prepared a report-Ex. P. 4 right on the spot and sent the same through his P.C. to his Police Station to register a case. That being so, he submitted, it could not be argued by the other side that there was delay in the matter of lodging the complaint. While countering the argument of Sri S.P. Kulkarni that P.W. 14 had not lodged a complaint at all, it was further argued by Sri Nanjundaiah that the evidence of P.W. 14 is to the effect that he was a stranger to the place and he was not even knowing the local language, Kannada and that when he was forced out of the lorry, he had reached 'Air Tech Machine Tools Factory' that was lying on the national highway near by and having reached P.W. 2, the Engineer/Supervisor of the said factory, he had to get himself guided to get into a truck to reach Hubli on the day next and that earlier to that, he had also made a frantic attempt to convey the episode in question to the KSRTC driver but was unsuccessful as the KSRTC driver was not knowing any other language than Kannada and further that, being a stranger, P.W. 14 had reached the Hubli Transport Office with great difficulty and that, when he had thus reached, there was a call from P.W. 3 to the official in-charge of the lorry transport Office informing that the lorry in question was found abandoned at Amminabhavi village and a dead body of a male person was found with bleeding injuries in tront of the lorry. Therefore, according to the learned State Public Prosecutor, that being the circumstances, there was no occasion for P.W. 14 to reach the Police Station to lodge a complaint and therefore according to him, there was nothing to argue for the other side to say that there was delay in lodging the complaint. Incidentally, he had pointed out that proof of recovery of M.O. 2-knife is of no consequence as the case of the prosecution was proved by circumstantial evidence to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.
26. In support of the argument, the learned State Public Prosecutor had also cited before us the following 5 decisions. They are:
1.Jaspal Singh v State of Punjab and Jindra and Another v State of Punjab.
2. Mohan Lal Pangasa v State of Uttar Pradesh.
3. Govinda Reddy and Others v State of Mysore.
4. Rajinder Kumar and Another v State of Punjab.
5. Aher Raja Khima v State of Saurashtra.
27. Finally, Sri Nanjundaiah in conclusion of his argument prayed that both the appeals of the appellants-accused persons be dismissed.
28. Having heard the learned Counsel appearing for the two sets of the appellants-accused persons and further the learned State Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State in both the appeals, we have carefully gone through the impugned judgment and order of conviction and furthermore the evidence on record of the learned Sessions Judge more than once as the prosecution case had to sustain only on the circumstantial evidence as there was no direct evidence on record as against the committal of murder of the deceased driver Satyanarayana Rao by the appellants-accused persons, as argued by all sides.
29. While going through the impugned Judgment and the records of the learned Sessions Judge, we have observed that the learned Sessions Judge had committed a glaring mistake while recording the statement of the appellant-accused No. 3 in the second appeal in not putting across him in his statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the incriminating evidence of P.W. 6 that Ex. P. 10 (Ex. P. 14 is the enlarge of Ex. P. 10), the left finger print taken by P.W. 16 tallied to the chance blood finger print of left finger that was found by P.W. 6 in M.O. 1, the lorry cabin door, (enlarged photograph as per Exs. P. 8 and P. 9 and certificate of P.W. 6 thereto as at Ex. P. 7) and despite such a fatal mistake on the part of the learned Sessions Judge, the same was very well relied upon by him to base the conviction and sentence; that being so, we thought it fit to put the same across the appellant-accused No. 3 in the instant appeal now, he being represented by Sri M.N. Gadag. On the same being put across, the learned Counsel Sri M.N. Gadag had admitted that P.W. 16 had taken the finger print of the appellant-accused No. 3 in the second appeal on 7-10-1992 and that since P.W. 16 did not speak thereto in his evidence, it could not be taken into consideration now and further that the chance bloodstained finger print on M.O. 1 was the concocted one. We deem it proper to reproduce what the learned Counsel Sri M.N. Gadag had stated in this regard. The same reads as hereunder :
"Ex. P. 14 is the finger print taken by P.W. 16 on 7-1-1992. Since P.W. 16 did not speak thereto in his evidence, it cannot be taken into consideration. Ex. P. 10 is the enlarged part of Ex. P. 14. So that also goes.
Ex. P. 8 is the bloodstained finger print on the angular portion of the truck door, M.O. 1. It is concocted".
30. The above exercise had been done by us only to make good the omission on the part of the learned Sessions Judge as the same is very much available for us as the appeal what we now hear is an extension of the original proceedings before the Sessions case in question and in hearing the appeal, we reappreciate the evidence on record either to confirm the judgment and order of conviction and sentence or to set aside the same. Now we come to the merit of the arguments advanced from both sides.
31. It was argued with all vehemence that the evidence of P.W. 14, the cleaner of the lorry was not at all reliable, particularly when according to the case of the prosecution, the said witness being the cleaner of the lorry in question had seen the appellants-accused persons at about 11 p.m. on 31-7-1992 when it was dark all around and furthermore, he had witnessed these persons hardly for a small duration when they alleged to have travelled from Kittur circle to a place near Air Tech Machine Tools factory on the Highway and that P.W. 14 had occasion to see the faces of these accused persons only by flash of the head light that emanated from the vehicles coming from the opposite direction and as such, it was impossible for P.W. 14 to identify the appellants-accused persons to fix them in the case and therefore the prosecution had organised, the test identification parade by the Taluk Magistrate-P.W. 11. In this regard, it was also vehemently argued that the whole proceedings of the test identification parade held by P.W. 11 in Exs. P. 19 to P. 24 was totally vitiated for the simple reason that P.W. 14 was made to reach the Police Station of P.W. 3 a day previous of such an identification parade and further that the Police in the Police Station of P.W. 3 had shown the print photographs of the appellants-accused persons that appeared in two Kannada dailies, Ex. D. 1 and Ex. D. 2 to aid P.W. 14 to identify the appellants-accused persons in the test identification parade held on the day next. That being the circumstance, the submission in this regard was that it was not possible for P.W. 14 to identify the appellants-accused persons to say with certainty that it was the appellants-accused persons who entered his lorry at Kittur circle on the relevant day. The argument of both the Counsels for the appellants-accused persons in this regard may appeal at once, but nevertheless, it is difficult for us to accept that argument of theirs to say that the appellants-accused persons were not to be properly identified by P.W. 14 at all. In this context it is to be pointed out that P.W. 14 being the cleaner of the lorry was a natural witness to be present at the point of time when appellants-accused persons stated to have entered the lorry at about 11 p.m. on 31-7-1992 at Kittur circle. As we see, it is in his evidence that all these appellants-accused persons having signalled to stop the lorry by showing their hands to the deceased driver and upon that the lorry was stopped by the deceased driver and further that thereafter the appellants-accused persons boarded the lorry presenting that they wanted to go over to Hubli and that when one of the persons gave Rs. 5/- as fare from Kittur circle to Hubli, the other two persons told that they had a note of Rs. 50/- and that since they had no change, they would pay the fare at Hubli. It was also in his evidence that when one of them sat behind the driver in the cabin, another sat next to him and the other person sat in front of him and that after the lorry had travelled for some distance, all the persons requested the driver to stop the lorry, saying that, that was the village they wanted to visit and therefore they desired to get down from the lorry and that, at that juncture when P.W. 14 asked them as to why they were demanding to stop the lorry as they boarded the lorry on the presentation that they wanted to go to Hubli and that, at that, the appellants-accused persons stated to have replied that they had work at that particular place and therefore they wanted the lorry to be stopped. It is further in the evidence of P.W. 14 that the person sitting behind the driver threw the chilly powder on the eyes of the driver and the person sitting next to him caught hold of him and assaulted him with his hands and that thereafter he being frightened climbed down from the lorry and ran to some distance in front of the lorry on the road. It is also in his evidence that when all the appellants-accused persons were in his lorry, he had seen the faces of the appellants-accused persons by the aid of the head light that was being flashed from the vehicles coming from the opposite direction. It therefore appears to us that since the duration of the stay of the appellants-accused persons was for sufficiently longer duration as they travelled from Kittur circle down to the point where P.W. 14 was forced out of the lorry, he had occasions all along to witness the faces of the appellants-accused persons with the help of the head lights of the vehicles coming from the opposite direction and as such, it could not be argued that it was not at all possible for P.W. 14 to see their faces and observe their facial appearances. In our considered view, the said duration was sufficiently longer for P.W. 14 to witness and observe the faces and facial features of the appellants-accused persons and therefore, it is difficult for us to accept the argument of their learned Counsel that it was not at all possible for P.W. 14 to identify the appellants-accused persons. Added to it, we cannot forget for a moment that there were two important occasions for P.W. 14 to observe the appellants-accused persons, for it is in his evidence, firstly that he collected fare from one of them when two others pleaded that they would pay at Hubli as they had a note of Rs. 50/- and secondly and more importantly, that before easing him out of the lorry, one of the accused persons sitting next to him had assaulted him. Since the said two important circumstances, P.W. 14 had witnessed himself at the spot, we are left with no doubt that it was quite possible for P.W. 14 to identify the appellants-accused persons himself.
32. It was argued by both the Counsels for the appellants-accused persons that the test identification parade held by P.W. 11 was vitiated, for, according to them, the print photographs of the appellants-accused persons were shown by the Police to P.W. 14 on the day previous of the test identification parade. This again is difficult for us to accept, for the reason that the print photographs in Exs. D. 1 and D. 2, in two Kannada dailies published from Hubli, were not of the appellants-accused persons alone, for as we see, there were 11 print photographs therein. Furthermore, the said print photographs are dark in black colour print in both Ex. D. 1 'Samyukta Karnataka' and Ex. D. 2, 'Sanje Vani', both local Kannada dailies published from Hubli. That being the position, it could not be argued that the test identification parade held by P.W. 11 was vitiated; let apart it had not been put in cross-examination of P.W. 14 that the Police did show Exs.D. 1 and D. 2 to him to identify the appellants-accused persons in the identification parade held. Therefore, we have got no hesitation to reject the said argument of the learned Counsel that the test identification parade culminating with the proceedings thereto in Exs.P. 19 to 24 had in any way vitiated. To say so, we have carefully gone through the evidence of P.W. 11-the Taluk Magistrate who held the test identification parade and further the Test Identification Parade proceedings, Ex. P. 19 to Ex. P. 24. We may add here that we discussed his evidence at length when we dealt with the argument of the learned State Public Prosecutor. Having gone through both, it does not appear to us that he, i.e., P.W. 11 had in any way faltered in conducting the test identification parade to the prejudice of the appellants-accused persons.
33. As pointed out by us, there was no direct evidence as to the act of murder of the deceased driver by the appellants-accused persons and the evidence was only by circumstances to connect the appellants-accused persons as to the act of murder of the deceased-driver. In this context, the following glaring circumstances are pertinent to be taken note of. They are:
(i) That, on the day of incident, the deceased was seen in the company of the appellants-accused persons last by P.W. 14, the cleaner of the lorry when he was assaulted and made to run away from the scene for safety of his life.
(ii) That, P.W. 14 after he was forced out of the lorry had seen his lorry moving towards Hubli beyond Narendra circle.
(iii) That, when P.W. 14 had reached his transport office at Hubli, P.W. 3 informed the person in charge of the transport office that the lorry in question was abandoned and dead body of the driver was found right in front of the lorry in a place called Amminabhavi village, the village to be reached beyond Narendra cross and earlier to the station, Dharwad with a deviation.
(iv) That, M.O. 1, the cabin door of the lorry was containing chance bloodstained finger print which later tallied to the left ring finger print of the appellant-accused No. 3 as deposed by P.W. 6 finger print expert.
(v) That, on 7-10-1992, P.W. 16 who was of special squad and nothing to do with the investigation of the case in question had found at an odd hour at about 10 p.m. all the appellants-accused persons in the company of yet another person by name Basavaraj Bilebal at Pinto cross in Hubli city and further that the appellant-accused person No. 1 on he being searched was found to have M.O. 10-chilly powder in his pant pocket.
(vi) That, the case of the prosecution is also that on the day of the incident on 31-7-1992, one of the accused persons was also stated to have thrown chilly powder on the face of the deceased Satyanarayana Rao before P.W. 14 was assaulted and made to climb down from the lorry and further made to run away from the scene.
(vii) That, P.W. 14 had identified the appellants-accused persons in the Test Identification Parade as the persons who entered his lorry at Kittur circle and that they have travelled along with him and the driver and further that it is they who forced him out of the lorry and taken the control of the lorry in the presence of the deceased driver, then alive.
(viii) That, the appellant-accused No. 3 in his further statement recorded through his learned Counsel by this Court under Section 313 of the Cr. P.C. admitted that P.W. 16 had taken his i.e., accused No. 3's finger print.
34. In the instant case in hand, a stark circumstance among the above circumstances is that the chance bloodstained finger print was found on the outer door of the cabin marked as M.O. 1 and that was found by P.W. 6, the finger print expert as the chance finger print of the left ring finger of the appellant-accused No. 3 in the second appeal and as a matter of fact, it is with that, the entire case was solved to file a charge-sheet by P.W. 15 as against all the appellants-accused persons.
35. The authoritative books on finger prints say that the ridges in the fingers both of the hands and the legs possess different characteristics and they are permanent from birth to death and even thereafter until the body is decomposed, that they may be temporarily destroyed owing to diseases, cuts and burns, etc. and further that as soon as the diseases, cuts or the burns were cured, the ridges in the fingers regain their normal shapes. Thus, according to the authoritative books, one can see that the ridges in the fingers have triple characteristics. They are: permanency, immutability and variety. It is said that these characteristics that place the finger prints on a strong foundation and further that, above all no finger prints unless they be of the same person and the same finger, are exactly alike in ridge characteristics and it is this definite varieties of finger impressions in the human world that make the finger print method of identification so true and accurate. In an authoritative Indian Book on the subject under the title, 'Law of Prints and Impressions' written by D. Venkaiah, published in the year 1969, refers to the results obtained by G. Kirchhoff, a German Scientist on the basis of the theory of probability by Sir E.R. Henry, the father of the science of finger prints and the same was made with reference to the book under the title "Classification and Uses of Finger Prints" by the above said scientist G. Kirchhoff. Under the synopsis: 'Probability in Mathematics', in Chapter II of the above book, the writer D. Venkaiah quotes as hereunder :
"..... Thus Kirchhoff's conclusion as to the probable existence of Fe in the Sun was considerably strengthened by the apparent relation between the brightness of the coincident lines in the two spectra". Sir E.R. Henry, the father of the science of finger prints, makes a reference in his book "Classification and Uses of Finger Prints" to the results obtained by Kirchhoff on the basis or the theory of probability. Now, G. Kirchhoff, the German Scientist, found coincidence between 70 spectral lines in iron vapour and in sunlight and asked if this coincidence could be reasonably attributed to chance.
After investigation he found that the probability of a "fortuitous coincidence" was approximately as 1: 1,000,000,000,000 - indeed a staggering figure. "Hence he argued that there can be no reasonable doubt of the existence of iron in the sun". By the same process of reasoning one can deduce that the chances of duplication in nature of ridge formations are 1 in an incalculable number. As a matter of fact Balthazard, the French Scientist, proved that "the chances of a duplication in the papillary ridges" on one of his fingers against that of any finger in the world were 1 in 1,606,937,974,174,171,729,761,809,705,564,167,968,221,676,069,604, 401,795,301,376 ! Sir Henry Galton sets a lower figure of 1 in 64,000,000,000".
36. In this regard, we may beneficially refer to the decision of the Suprme Court in the case of Govinda Reddy, supra, more popularly known as Belur Srinivas Iyengar's case, cited before us by the learned State Public Prosecutor on the point of comparison of finger print under Section 45 of the Evidence Act. In the said case, the Supreme Court held as hereunder:
"(1) Evidence Act, 1872, Section 45 -- Finger prints --Comparison.
The science of comparison of finger prints has developed to a stage of exactitude. It is quite possible to compare the impressions taken from finger prints of individuals with the disputed impressions, provided they are sufficiently clear and enlarged photographs are available. The identification of finger impressions with the aid of a good magnifying glass is not difficult particularly when the photographs of latent and patent impressions are pasted side by side".
37. That being the precision and definiteness in the science of finger prints, we are not left with any doubt that the chance bloodstained finger print found on M.O. 1, the lorry cabin door was of none else, but of the appellant-accused No. 3 in the second appeal, The very fact that this accused person was found in the company of the appellants-accused Nos. 1 and 2 in the first appeal and further in the company of yet another person by name Easavaraj Bilebal on 7-10-1992 by P.W. 16, the Police Inspector of Special Squad for detection of dacoity cases in Hubli city, when the incident of murder of the deceased driver Satyanarayana Rao had occurred a couple of months earlier on 31-7-1992 outside his jurisdiction, and further that all of them were found at Pinto Cross at Hubli, that too in an odd hour at 10 p.m. under suspicious circumstances lend credence all the more to the case of the prosecution.
38. In this regard, we also tried to find out whether the ocular evidence tendered by P.W. 14 and the circumstantial evidence in the case as stated above were in any way corroborated by the medical evidence on record or not. In so doing, we have found out that there was further corroboration of the ocular evidence as well as the circumstantial evidence by the medical evidence on record. That medical evidence we find in Ex. P. 1, the post-mortem report issued by P.W. 1-the doctor who had performed the autopsy on the dead body of the deceased and further in his oral evidence before the learned Sessions Judge. P.W. 1-doctor had found semi digested food to an extent of 350 ml. in the stomach of the deceased and according to him, the deceased died as a result of haemorrhage and choking due to multiple stab injuries on the vital organ like heart. The said observation of P.W. 1, we find in the post-mortem report-Ex. P. 1.
39. In this connection, it is worthwhile to refer to the ocular evidence of P.W. 14, the lorry cleaner. It is in his evidence that he and the deceased lorry driver left Belgaum at about 7 p.m. on 31-7-1992 and on their way, somewhere near Kittur, they halted the lorry near a 'dhaba' in order to take their food and further that, after taking the food they came near Kittur circle and at that circle, three persons shown hand signal to stop the lorry. Here, it has to be noted that it was at about 11 p.m. on 31-7-1992, P.W. 14 was forced out of the lorry and all the accused persons seized the lorry and took control of the same from the deceased when he was very much alive. It is also in the evidence of P.W. 14 that he had seen the lorry thereafter going towards Hubli when he was near Narendra circle and in the said facts and circumstances of the case, it could be said that it is only after 11 p.m. on 31-7-1992 the deceased driver was done to death and if that is so, it is quite natural that P.W. 1 found the semi-digested food in the stomach of the deceased when he had conducted autospy on the dead body of the deceased driver as at Ex. P. 1. That being the medical evidence, apart from the fatal injuries found on the dead body of the deceased, we are but to hold that the ocular evidence of P.W. 14 and further the circumstantial evidence on record stand corroborated by the medical evidence on record too.
40. In this context we feel it proper to quote what the three Judges Bench of the Supreme Court held in the case of Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v State of Maharashtra, and further what the Division Bench of this Court held in the case of N. Rajendra Prasad Bhat v State of Karnataka. In both the matters the convictions were based on circumstantial evidence.
In the case of Sharad Birdhichand, supra, the Supreme Court held thus:
"(E) Evidence Act (1 of 1872), Section 3 -- Circumstantial evidence -- Conviction on basis of-- Conditions precedent.
The following conditions must be fulfilled before a case against an accused based on circumstantial evidence can be said to be fully established.
(1) the circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should be fully established. The circumstances concerned 'must or should' and not 'may be' established;
(2) the facts so established should be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused, that is to say, they should not be explainable on any other hypothesis except that the accused is guilty;
(3) the circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and tendency;
(4) they should exclude every possible hypothesis except the one to be proved; and (5) there must be a chain of evidence so complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for the conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and must show that in all human probability the act must have been done by the accused. Case law discussed.
A case can be said to be proved only when there is certain and explicit evidence and no person can be convicted on pure moral conviction".
In the case of N. Rajendra Prasad Bhat, supra, the Division Bench of this Court held thus:
"INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872, Section 3 --Circumstantial evidence -- Appreciation of, in criminal trial -- Chain of circumstances must be so closely kni,t so as to exclude all reasonable hypothesis of innocence of accused -- Chain must clinch the issue of guilt -- Mere abscondance is not incriminating circumstance against accused.
HELD: In a case which is based on circumstantial evidence, the circumstances alleged against the accused must be conclusively established and the chain of circumstances must be so closely knit so as to exclude all the reasonable hypothesis of the innocence of the accused. The evidence must point only to the guilt of the accused and if the evidence leads to two interpretations, the interpretation in favour of the accused must be given effect to .... Mere abscondence is not an incriminating circumstance against an accused. Even innocent persons may abscond due to the fear of the police or on account of avoiding the humiliation of being involved falsely in a crime".
41. In the light of the above strong evidence on record and further in the light of the above decisions of the Apex Court and further of this Court, it appears to us that all the circumstances set out in para 33 above had been well proved by the prosecution before the learned Sessions Judge and all those circumstances point to the guilt of the appellants-accused persons alone and none else, without there being any doubt whatsoever. Furthermore, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, time and again held that a conviction can safely be based on circumstantial evidence provided several circumstances relied upon by the prosecution are established beyond doubt and that the incriminating facts are such as to the incompatibility with the innocence of the accused and incapable of explanation on any reasonable hypothesis other than the guilt of the accused persons.
42. Here, in the instant case in hand, it is pertinent to note that the appellants-accused persons did not come up with any explanation either in their defence or in their statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the learned Sessions Judge as to how they had parted with the company of the deceased having taken his physical possession at about 11 p.m. on 31-7-1992 in the lorry. On the other hand, the evidence on record is that on the following morning on 1-8-1992 when the lorry was found abandoned, the dead body of the deceased was found in front of the lorry at Amminabhavi village near Dharwad. In this context, it is relevant to observe that in a reported decision in the case of Vithal v State of Maharashtra, the Supreme Court held that, when no explanation was offered by the accused as to how he had parted with the company of the deceased, the only inference is that the accused alone had caused the death. This exactly is the position in the instant case in hand, for the case of the appellants-accused persons was one of total denial and as such, they too did not offer any explanation thereto in their statement under Section 313 of the Cr. P.C.
43. The learned Counsel for the appellant in the second appeal Sri S.P. Kulkarni was at pain to disjunct the appeal filed by his clients i.e., appellants-accused Nos. 1 and 2 from the one filed by Sri M.N. Gadag, for and on behalf of the appellant-accused No. 3. He had also cited innumerable number of decisions in support of his argument. We have carefully gone through the above decisions cited by him. We only say in that regard that there is no quarrel as to the principles of law laid down in the said decisions, but unfortunately for him, none of the decisions is of any assistance to his case in the facts and circumstances of the case, as we have discussed more fully as above; the reason being that the parties were thick and thin in association of the appellant-accused No. 3 in the act of murder of the deceased driver-Satyanarayana Rao.
44. Therefore, we do not find any merit worth the name in either of the appeals herein preferred by the two sets of accused persons. Hence, we are but to confirm the impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence of the appellants-accused persons for the offences committed by them under Sections 323 and 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC passed by the learned Sessions Judge in the sessions case.
45. To depart from the discussion of the case in hand, we want to record words of appreciation for the Investigating Officers in the case, for it is only by their scientific approach and by application of the scientific techniques in the field of the finger prints, the crime was successfully detected and culprits in the case were shown their place; but for it, probably the law enforcing agency would not have been successful at all in the case in detecting the capital crime.
46. In this context, we may observe here that the Forensic Science played vital role in crime detections today. The well organised criminals in the criminal world, as a matter of fact, hold the society and the law abiding citizens to ransom; of late we are also witnessing organised crimes with international ramifications. That being so, a systematic scientific approach by the Investigating Agency to detect the crimes by resorting to the latest techniques and devices is the need of the hour. It therefore appears to us that it is good of the State to give equal importance for development of Forensic Science too in the matter of crime detections by making adequate budgetary provisions to the said Branch also (if not so made yet), so that more and more personnel in the Forensic Branch are trained inside and outside India to update their knowledge in the latest techniques in the field of Forensic Science to be in aid to the law enforcing agencies of the State in the matter of crime detection. All the more the society will be safe and secure if the Authorities are ahead of their time in this regard; lest, we fear, they may be caught unaware.
47. Now we come to the result part of the appeals before us. For the aforesaid reasons, we are not inclined to allow the appeals. Both the appeals therefore fail and accordingly stand dismissed.
48. Let the Registry forward copies of this judgment one each to the Chief Secretary, Government of Karnataka, Secretary to Government of Karnataka, Home Department, Director for Forensic Science, Government of Karnataka and the Director General of Police in Karnataka, Bangalore, in view of certain general observations came to be made by us in the context of deciding these two appeals as in para 46, supra, whatever its worth.