Karnataka High Court
State Of Karnataka vs Chandrappa Sannatayi S/O. Bharamappa on 6 March, 2023
Author: H.T.Narendra Prasad
Bench: H.T.Narendra Prasad
-1-
CRL.A No. 100512 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T. G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100512 OF 2021 (A)
BETWEEN:
STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP. BY THE POLICE SUB-INSPECTOR
RATTIHALLI POLICE STATION,
HIREKERUR CIRCLE,
HAVERI DISTRICT HAVERI
THROUGH THE ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH. .. APPELLANT
(BY SRI.V.M.BANAKAR, ADDL.SPP)
AND:
CHANDRAPPA SANNATAYI S/O. BHARAMAPPA
AGE. 30 YEARS, OCC. NIL
R/O. KAMALAPUR VILLAGE,
TQ. HIREKERUR, DIST. HAVERI-581110. .. RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.S.P.KANDAGAL, AMICUS CURIAE)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S 378(1) AND (3) OF
ANNAPURNA
CHINNAPPA CR.P.C., SEEKING TO GRANT LEAVE TO APPEAL AGAINST JUDGMENT
DANDAGAL
AND ORDER ACQUITTAL DATED 12.02.2019 PASSED BY THE II
Digitally signed by
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT HAVERI (SITTING
ANNAPURNA
CHINNAPPA
DANDAGAL
AT RANEBENNUR) IN SESSIONS CASE NO.80/2017, AND TO SET
Location: HIGHCOURT
OF KARNATAKA-
DHARWAD BENCH
ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DATED
Date: 2023.03.28
11:02:02 +0530 12.02.2019 PASSED BY THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS JUDGE AT HAVERI (SITTING AT RANEBENNUR) IN
SESSIONS CASE NO.80/2017, AND TO CONVICT AND SENTENCE THE
RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 323,
307, 504 AND 506 OF IPC.
-2-
CRL.A No. 100512 of 2021
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY,
T.G.SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The State has challenged the judgment of acquittal dated 12.02.2019 passed in S.C.No.80/2017 by the Court of II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Haveri (Sitting at Ranebennur) (the 'Trial Court' for short).
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to as per their status in the Trial Court.
3. Briefly stated the facts are that, PW- 3/Hanumanthappa Sannatayi is a senior citizen aged 70 years; he runs a petty shop in front of his house at Kamalapur village of Hirekerur taluk. On 12.03.2017 in the midnight at about 12 o'clock, PW-3 was sleeping on the pial of his house, at that time, the accused herein came to him, made him to wake up asking him to provide him beedi from his shop. Since PW-3 was in deep sleep, he had refused to wake up and provide beedi to accused, as it was late night. By the said act of PW-3, accused got -3- CRL.A No. 100512 of 2021 enraged and he threatened PW-3 that how he will allow him to sleep without providing him beedi and insulted him in a filthy language. Thereafter, PW-3 woke up and went to attend nature call near drainage situated besides his house. The accused in prosecution of his enragement picked up a stone, went behind PW-3 with an intention to commit his murder, thrown the stone on the head of PW-3 and made attempts to commit his murder. Due to assault, PW-3 was fallen on the ground with head and facial injuries. The accused escaped from the spot by committing criminal intimidation.
4. PW-2/Bharamappa Sannatayi, who is the son of PW-3, came to know about the incident. PW- 4/Chandrappa Hardalli, PW-5/Ganeshappa Sannaanji, PW- 6/Nagarajappa Doddaanaji, PW-7/Kamalamma Sannatayi, PW-8/Malatesh Tumminakatti and PW-9/Chandrappa Vaddar, the fellow villagers rushed to the spot, rescued PW-3 and taken him to hospital. On the complaint of PW- 2, the law was set into motion in Crime No.30/2017 of -4- CRL.A No. 100512 of 2021 Rattihalli Police Station. PW-14/Hanumanthappa Kambali is the Investigating Officer, who has investigated the matter and brought the accused before the court for trial. On committal by the Principal Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Hirekerur in C.C.No.156/2017, the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Haveri, registered the case in S.C.No.80/2017 and assigned the matter to the II Additional District and Sessions judge at Haveri sitting at Ranebennur, for trial.
5. The accused stood for trial for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 307, 504 and 506 of IPC by pleading not guilty of the charges. The prosecution placed the oral evidence of PWs-1 to 15, marked Exs.P1 to P13 and M.Os.1 and 2. After examining the accused and hearing both sides, the trial court has passed the impugned judgment holding that the accused is not guilty and acquitted him of all the charges. Aggrieved by the order of acquittal, the State has filed this appeal. -5- CRL.A No. 100512 of 2021
6. We have heard the arguments of Sri.V.M.Banakar, learned Additional SPP for the appellant/State and Sri.S.P.Kandagal, learned Amicus Curiae for the respondent/accused.
7. It is the contention of the learned Additional SPP that the prosecution examined the injured as PW-3. His testimony is supported by PWs-4, 7 to 9, who are the eyewitnesses to the incident and the injury suffered by PW-3 has been certified by PW-10/Dr.Shamshad Begum. Though the incident took place in the midnight, the evidence of PW-11/Shashidhara.E.B., Engineer of HESCOM would point out that there was an electricity supply at the time of incident. If the evidence of these witnesses is marshalled, the prosecution is able to explain accused approaching PW-3 seeking beedi on the midnight, on his refusal, the accused abused him, threatened that how he will sleep without giving him beedi. Thereafter when PW-3 was attending the nature call, accused attempted to commit his murder by throwing stone on his head. This -6- CRL.A No. 100512 of 2021 has been explained through positive evidence, which is qualitative, but the trial court did not appreciate the same and the reasons assigned by the trial court will not stand to its reason and sought for interference and setting aside the acquittal judgment and to convict the accused for the charges leveled against him.
8. Per contra, learned Amicus Curiae has contended that the complainant is the son of the injured, who has not seen the incident, but he has given evidence as if he had seen the incident. PW-3/victim is aged 80 years, he was attending the nature call sitting towards drainage of 2½ feet depth and because of midnight and was sleepy/drowsy, he might have fallen down and sustained injuries. The entire village was sleeping and all of a sudden, the prosecution brought before the court, PWs-4 to 9 as eyewitnesses, which is totally incredible. Even two of the witnesses i.e., PWs-5 and 6 have turned hostile and having regard to the circumstances that there were no eyewitnesses to the incident, PWs-4 to 9 are planted, they -7- CRL.A No. 100512 of 2021 have given stereotype evidence as tutored by the Police and the evidence of PW-10 and the injury certificate at Ex.9 did point out that the injuries are simple in nature, but the case has been blown to the disproportion only to see that the accused was sent to judicial custody and they have been succeeded as the accused was in judicial custody from the date of his arrest till the date of judgment. The accused was sufficiently kept in the judicial custody and the trial court has rightly observed that the prosecution evidence cannot be relied upon and it is alleged that the accused was mentally unsound and there was no certificate issued by any of the competent authorities that the accused was fit to stand for trial. Under these circumstances, the order of acquittal recorded by the trial court is proper and he has supported the impugned judgment.
9. We have given our anxious consideration to the arguments addressed on both sides and perused the material on record.
-8-CRL.A No. 100512 of 2021
10. The prosecution has relied upon the testimony of PWs-1 to 15. Let us examine the weight of the prosecution evidence.
11. PW-2/Bharamappa Sannatayi is the son of the victim. His testimony shows that on 12.03.2017 at 10.00 p.m., he was sleeping in his house. In the midnight at 12 o'clock, the accused came and woke up his father asking for beedi. Since it was late in the night, his father did not provide him beedi and sent him back. Thereafter his father had gone to attend the nature call near drainage, the accused being enraged by the conduct of his father in not giving him beedi, inflicted injuries on the head of his father with a stone. The fellow villagers awakened him and he went and saw that blood was oozing from the head and nose of his father and he was lying on the ground. On enquiry, his father informed him that the accused inflicted injury as he did not provide him beedi. PWs-4 to 7 were present and the accused was found escaped from the spot. Since his father has suffered injuries over his head, face, -9- CRL.A No. 100512 of 2021 chest and back, he has admitted him to Government Hospital, Honnali. On the next day, he filed Ex.P6/complaint to the Police. Very day, the Police inspected the spot by drawing mahazar as per Ex.P1 and seized M.O.1/stone, M.Os.2 and 3/clothes of his father.
12. PW-3/Hanumanthappa Sannathayi is the victim. His testimony shows that at Kamalapura in front of his house, he is running a petty shop. On the date of incident at 10.00 p.m., he was sleeping on the pial of his house. At about 11.00 p.m., the accused approached him asking for beedi. Since he was sleeping, he told the accused that it is not possible and asked him to go. After some time, he went to attend the nature call, at that time, the accused came there and saying that he is going to kill him, thrown stone on his head. He suffered injuries on the head, nose and both hands and fallen to the ground. The accused tried to strangulate him. When he cried for help, the accused freed him and ran away from the spot. He was shifted to Honnali Government Hospital and in this
- 10 -
CRL.A No. 100512 of 2021regard, his son PW-1 has filed a complaint to the Rattihalli Police. He identified M.O.1 is the stone thrown on his head and M.Os.2 and 3 are the clothes worn by him stained with blood.
13. PW-4/Chandrappa Hardalli is a fellow villager of Kamalapura. His testimony shows that on 12.03.2017 at 12.00 midnight, the accused came to PW-3 asking for beedi from his shop. The accused was advised that it was midnight, the shop was closed and it is not possible to give him beedi. Later when PW-3 went to attend the nature call, the accused came behind him holding M.O.1/stone and assaulted on his head, due to which, PW-3 sustained head and facial injuries and his body and clothes were stained with blood. Since he cried for help, he and other three persons rushed to the spot, by that time, the accused had already fled from the scene of crime. Immediately PW-3 was taken to hospital in an Ambulance and in this regard, he has given statement before the Police.
- 11 -
CRL.A No. 100512 of 2021
14. PW-5/Ganeshappa Sannaanaji is also a resident of Kamalapura and neighbour of PW-3. His evidence shows that on the date of incident between 11.30 p.m. and 12.00 midnight, he heard hue and cry of PW-3 and rushed to him, saw head injury sustained by means of a stone, he had seen the accused hitting on the head of PW- 3, who was lying on the road. By seeing the arrival of people, accused ran away from the spot. Since there was a street light at the spot, he could be able to see the incident. According to him, M.O.1 was the stone used to assault PW-3 and M.Os.2 and 3 are the clothes of PW-3, which were stained with blood.
15. Since PW-5 was treated as hostile witness, he was cross-examined and during the course of cross- examination by the prosecution, he has admitted the suggestion of the learned Public Prosecutor that the accused was the person, who abused, insulted and committed criminal intimidation and made attempt to commit murder of PW-3.
- 12 -
CRL.A No. 100512 of 2021
16. PW-6/Nagarajappa Doddaanaji is also a resident of Kamalapura. His testimony shows that on 12.03.2017, he was sitting in front of his house near the house of PW-
3. On hearing hue and cry of PW-3, he rushed to him, found accused hitting PW-3 by means of M.O.1/stone, causing him head injury, the accused abused and threatened PW-3 that he will kill him and by seeing the arrival of fellow villagers, he ran away from the spot. He saw bloodstains on the clothes of PW-3 at M.Os.2 and 3.
17. PW-7/Kamalamma Sannatayi is the niece of PW-3. According to her, PW-3 was sleeping in front of the house, at about 12.00 midnight. The accused approached him asking for beedi, when he refused to give, he threatened him that he will kill him and thereafter by means of stone at M.O.1 caused head injury, due to which, blood started oozing from the injury which stained the clothes at M.Os.2 and 3 worn by PW-3.
18. The testimony of PW-8/Malathesh Tumminakatti shows that on the date of incident at about 12.00
- 13 -
CRL.A No. 100512 of 2021midnight, he was sitting near Kariyamma temple in his village Kamalapura. At that time, when PW-3 was in his house, accused approached PW-3 asking for beedi in his shop. Since the shop was closed and PW-3 was sleeping, he refused to open the shop and give beedi. Thereafter PW-3 went for attending the nature call. At that time, accused brought M.O.1/stone nurturing ill-will that PW-3 did not give him beedi and inflicted head injury for which PW-3 fell down and sustained facial and head injury with bloodstains on his clothes at M.Os.2 and 3. The fellow villagers rushed to rescue PW-3 and accused by seeing them escaped from the spot.
19. The testimony of PW-9/Chandrappa Vaddara points out that PW-3 was running a petty shop in front of his shop and at about 12 midnight, he was sitting near Kariyamma temple in the village and PW-3 was sleeping on the pial of his house where he saw the accused asking him to give beedi for which he was telling that it was late night and he will not open the shop and give him beedi.
- 14 -
CRL.A No. 100512 of 2021Thereafter PW-3 went to attend the nature call. The accused brought M.O.1/stone, inflicted head injury with an intention to kill him. PW-3 fell down to the ground, sustained facial injury with bleeding and the clothes of PW-3 i.e., M.Os.2 and 3 were stained with blood. The accused after seeing the arrival of fellow villagers to the spot managed to escape from the spot.
20. PW-10/Dr.Shamshad Begum is the Medical Officer of Government Hospital, Honnali. Her testimony shows that on 13.03.2017 at about 2.30 a.m. she has treated PW-3, who was brought in 108 Ambulance. She found the following injuries: (1) Lacerated wound of size 5 cm x 1 cm with bone deep over centre of scalp with bleeding (2) Swelling over left side of forehead (3) Lacerated wound of size 1 cm x 0.5 cm x 0.5 cm nose with bleeding. She has treated him and referred him to a Surgeon for higher treatment. The injuries so sustained by PW-3 were by means of a hard blunt object and the said injuries were simple in nature and Ex.P9 is the wound
- 15 -
CRL.A No. 100512 of 2021certificate that she has issued to the Police. M.O.1 was shown to her for the opinion. She is unable to give opinion as M.O.1 was a big size stone. But in the cross- examination, she gives an opinion that if a person skids and fell down to the ground, the injuries referred in Ex.P9 were possible. Hence, from the evidence of PW-10, it can only be seen that she has treated PW-3, who was brought in Ambulance, for the injuries mentioned in Ex.P9, but Ex.P9 does not point out about the history of injuries or weapon used and even who was the assailant.
21. PW-12/F.N.Kundoor is the Head Constable of Rattihalli Police Station. His testimony shows that on 13.03.2017 at 2.30 p.m. he received Ex.P6/complaint of PW-2 and registered Ex.P11/FIR.
22. PW-13/Malleshappa Karjagi is the ASI of Rattihalli Police Station. On 13.03.2017, as per the instructions of PW-14, he has visited the Honnali Government Hospital where he saw PW-3 was admitted
- 16 -
CRL.A No. 100512 of 2021with history of injuries and he has recorded his statement as per Ex.P7.
23. PW-14/Hanumanthappa Kambali is ASI of Rattihalli Police Station. His testimony shows that on 13.03.2017 at Rattihalli, it was a Holi festival. On receiving a phone information about the incident, he requested PW-13 to visit the hospital. Later on the very day, he visited the spot, drawn mahazar at Ex.P1 in a place shown to him by PW-1/Vijaya Balamoori and CW- 3/Siddappa and at the spot, he has seized M.O.1/stone, M.Os.2 and 3/clothes of PW-3 and taken Exs.P2 to 5/photographs. He has also received Ex.P7 from PW-13 being recorded at Honnali Hospital. He came to know that the fellow villagers of Kamalapura have caught-hold of the accused, tied him to the pole in the village. Hence, he went and took the accused to his custody. Since the fellow villagers stated that the accused is mentally ill, he has sent him to the District Hospital at Haveri where he was admitted as inpatient and on 15.03.2017 he was
- 17 -
CRL.A No. 100512 of 2021brought from the hospital, arrested and subjected to judicial custody. He collected the information from Electricity Department regarding supply of electricity on the date of incident and thereafter collected injury certificate from the Medical Officer and on completion of the investigation filed the charge sheet. Thereafter he has received the FSL report at Ex.P12 and it was also submitted to the court.
24. PW-1/Vijaya Balamoori is the panch witness to Ex.P1/spot mahazar. His testimony shows that on 12.03.2017 he was called to the spot by the Police between 4.00 to 5.00 p.m. He saw the place of incident where the Police have drawn Ex.P1/mahazar and seized M.O.1/stone at the spot, so also clothes of PW-3 at M.Os.2 and 3, which were stained with blood. M.Os.2 to 5 are the photographs taken at the time of mahazar.
25. The testimony of PW-11/Shashidhara E.B., In- charge Section Officer of HESCOM, shows that the Police have requested about the supply of electricity at
- 18 -
CRL.A No. 100512 of 2021Kamalapura village on 12.03.2017. He has verified the records and issued letter at Ex.P10 stating that the Power Distribution Centre had confirmed that there was electricity supply at Kamalapura between 7.00 p.m. and 12.00 midnight.
26. PW-15/Dr.Chaya Kumari is the in-charge Deputy Director of RFSL, Davanagere. Her testimony shows that on examination of M.Os.1 to 3 regarding existence of bloodstains on the said objects, she found that there were stains on M.Os.2 and 3, which were of 'B' Group human blood. In this regard, she issued the certificate at Ex.P12. Her evidence is very clear that she did not notice any bloodstains on M.O.1/stone for conducting serology test. Hence, from the RFSL report, except on the cloths of PW-3, no bloodstains were found on the alleged weapon of offence.
27. This is the weight of evidence that the prosecution is relying upon so as to explain charge against the accused.
- 19 -
CRL.A No. 100512 of 2021
28. Now the points that arise for our consideration are:
(1) Whether the evidence of the prosecution is able to explain the alleged offences against the accused?
(2) Whether the impugned judgment is
perverse, erroneous and calls for
interference?
Reg.Point No.1:
29. As we referred above, the evidence of PW-2, the son of the victim, shows that he was sleeping outside of his house; the fellow villagers came and awakened him;
he went out and on coming to know about the incident, saw his father suffering from head and facial injuries and for that reason, he has taken him to the hospital. This is the version of the prosecution also. On the contrary, we find from the evidence of PW-2 that he has deposed as if he was very well present when the incident took place, he had seen the accused asking his father to give beedi, his father refused as it was too late and for this reason, the
- 20 -
CRL.A No. 100512 of 2021accused abused his father, threatened him to teach him a lesson and by means of M.O.1/stone hit against the head of his father, causing bleeding injuries and thereafter escaped from the spot. Hence, there are two versions of PW-2. If the evidence of PW-2 is to be believed, it has to be believed in both versions, if both the versions are believed, naturally doubt arises as to the veracity of his evidence. This indicates that the very person, who set the law into motion, is so interested and has given such an evidence that his testimony is tainted with interestedness. Whether the evidence of this person can be relied or not is to be considered.
30. From the testimony of PWs-5 and 6, the defence has elicited in the cross-examination that when they came to the spot, PW-3 went near the drainage for attending the nature call. He was aged 80 years, his eye sight was very low and by the time they went to the spot, the fellow villagers were talking about the incident. If that is so, PWs-5 and 6 cannot be treated as eyewitnesses.
- 21 -
CRL.A No. 100512 of 2021
31. It is the defence of the accused that in view of PW-3 was aged 80 years having low eye sight, while attending the nature call might have fallen down to the drainage and suffered facial injuries. This aspect did take support from the evidence of PW-10 doctor that if a person falls on the ground, the injuries that were seen on the face of PW-3 were possible.
32. The incident took place in the midnight at 12 o'clock, that too, when PW-3 was attending the nature call sitting on the drainage in the village. PW-3 refused to give beedi to the accused on the ground that it was midnight. The evidence of PW-3 did not point out presence of any fellow villagers near his house or shop nor anybody sitting near the temple. Under these circumstances, if we appreciate the evidence of PWs-4, 7 to 9, it is astonishing that they have given stereotype evidence as if they were very well present near PW-3 anticipating that the accused will come and ask for beedi with PW-3, PW-3 will be going
- 22 -
CRL.A No. 100512 of 2021to refuse it and accused will be going to assault him by means of M.O.1.
33. In the normal course, as we see in the villages, people will lock themselves inside the house by 7.00 p.m. But here, it is a special village where even at midnight people were available at the spot readily and waiting for the incident to happen. Therefore, the conduct of PWs-4, 7 to 9 itself shows that they are very much interested, the reason has been brought out in the evidence of all these eyewitnesses that the accused was not in a sound state of mind, he was a mentally ill person moving around the village, for this reason they want to avoid him, they wanted to see that the accused be put behind the bar. Surprisingly, they were successful in doing so, as we find from the evidence of PW-14 that the entire Kamalapura village were against the accused, he was caught-hold and tied in the village and informed the Police. When he visited the village, he saw a mentally ill person being tied by the fellow villagers. For this reason, he was referred to
- 23 -
CRL.A No. 100512 of 2021the District Hospital, Haveri. Hence, the reason is very natural why PWs-4, 7 to 9 have deposed against the accused including PW-2, who is not an eyewitness claiming before the court that he is also an eyewitness.
34. Interestingly, PW-10/Medical Officer was shocked by seeing M.O.1 as the weapon of offence, as, if anyone assaults by means of such a huge sized stone on the head of 80 years old person, it could have killed him at the spot, but the injuries found on the head and face of PW-3 as referred in Ex.P9 are so simple in nature, which can only be possible if a person falls on a rough surface with the face turning towards the ground and M.O.1/stone might not have caused any such injury. This has been supported by PW-15/FSL expert that on examination of M.O.1, she did not find any bloodstains on it, bloodstains were found only on M.Os.2 and 3. If really M.O.1 was used as weapon of offence, the bloodstains ought to have been found on it. Hence, the medical evidence as well as the FSL evidence
- 24 -
CRL.A No. 100512 of 2021go against the prosecution that M.O.1 was not the weapon of offence and it was not used for inflicting injury on PW-3.
35. Another aspect interesting to note is regarding electricity supply in the village. The incident took place after 12 o'clock in the midnight. In this regard, it is relevant to refer to the evidence of PW-11/In-charge Section Officer of HESCOM, Masur, who is having the jurisdiction of Kamalapura. His certificate at Ex.P10 was based on the records maintained in the HESCOM office. According to him and his report, there was a power supply at Kamalapura village on 12.03.2017 between 7.00 p.m. and 12 midnight. Interestingly, the incident took place after 12 o'clock where there was no electricity supply. Contrarily we find from all the interested witnesses i.e., PWs-2 to 9 that there was an electricity supply in the village even after 12 o'clock midnight. All these factors clearly point out that the entire village was against the accused. It is pertinent to note that PW.3 might have fallen to the drainage while attending the nature call,
- 25 -
CRL.A No. 100512 of 2021sustained facial injuries and this 80 years with low eye sight being turned out to be a blessings for the entire village. Unfortunately, we find that here is a person, inspite of mentally ill, neither the trial court nor the appellate court did observe anything about the mental illness of the accused and there was no confirmation by the trial court whether the accused was fit to stand for trial, but the mentally ill person has been subjected to trial, though fortunately he was acquitted, unfortunately he was arrested on 13.03.2017 and he was subjected to judicial custody and he was set at liberty only on 12.02.2019 after a lapse of one year 11 months. Even otherwise, if we consider the submission of the learned Addl.SPP that the accused, for the reason of PW-2 not giving beedi, might have pulled or pushed him to the ground asking him to open the shop and to give him beedi. During that stint, PW-3 might have sustained certain injuries. Even otherwise, if the case of the prosecution is accepted having regard to the simple
- 26 -
CRL.A No. 100512 of 2021injuries sustained by PW-3, the period already undergone by the accused will be sufficient as pre-trial conviction.
36. Thus, on totality of the evidence and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any quality of evidence which is able to explain the charges leveled against the accused. Reg. Point No.2:
37. We have perused the impugned judgment. The trial court has recorded its finding that the witnesses are interested, they have given stereotype evidence and also referred to the medical evidence and the FSL evidence and observed no bloodstains on M.O.1 and came to the conclusion that the evidence is not inspiring the confidence of the court in extending the benefit of doubt. In view of the same, we do not find any illegality or irregularity in the impugned judgment and therefore, the appeal is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed.
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
- 27 -
CRL.A No. 100512 of 2021We appreciate the valuable assistance given by the learned Amicus Curiae. We fix his remuneration at Rs.5,000/- (five thousand rupees only) to be paid by the High Court Legal Services Committee.
SD JUDGE SD JUDGE KNM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 59