Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

The present appeal is preferred by the appellants who were arraigned as Accused Nos.1 to 9 in S.C.No.3/2010 challenging the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Haveri, sitting at Ranebennur, vide judgment dated 28.08.2015.

2. The Trial Court has convicted the accused/appellants for the various offences and sentenced them to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month with a fine of Rs.500/- each with default sentence for the offence under Section 143 read with Section 149 of IPC, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months with a fine of Rs.1,000/- each for the offence under Section 148 read with Section 149 of IPC, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year with a fine of Rs.1,000/- each for the offence punishable under Section 452 read with Section 149 of IPC and also sentenced them to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months with a fine of Rs.500/- each for the offence under Section 504 read with Section 149 of IPC, and also sentenced them to undergo simple imprisonment for one month with a fine of Rs.1,000/- each for the offence under Section 506 read with Section 149 of IPC, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month with a fine of Rs.500/- each for the offence under Section 323 read with Section 149 of IPC. Further accused were also sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 149 of IPC with fine of Rs.5,000/- each with default sentence.

3. Before adverting to the evidence on record, it is just and necessary for us to have brief factual matrix of the case.

4. The case of the prosecution as per the entire charge-sheet papers are that the complainant/Veerabhadrappa has been residing in Madlur in Hirekerur Taluk, Haveri District along with his family members. His father Veerabhadrappa has got a brother by name Rudrappa. They were separated and residing separately. There has been lot of dispute with reference to the properties with the uncle of the complainant by name Rudrappa and there are civil and criminal cases lodged between the parties in various courts. In this background, it is alleged that on 03.09.2009 in the morning at about 10.00 a.m., when the complainant, Veerabhadrappa had been to his garden land, at that time, some of the accused persons by name Chandrappa, Basappa, Mallappa and Shantappa were indulged in cutting a tree. In that context, the complainant told them not to cut the tree till the partition takes place with regard to the said property.

23. Under the above said facts and circumstances, we are of the opinion that the view taken by the Trial Court may also be possible view, but another view as narrated by us is also possible and plausible view on the basis of the evidence on record. Therefore, we prefer to substitute our view on the principle that the view which is favourable to the accused has to be preferred. With these observations, we proceed to pass the following:

ORDER The appeal is allowed. Consequently, the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Haveri, sitting at Ranebennur, dated 28 t h day of August, 2015 in S.C.No.3/2010 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 148, 452, 504, 506, 323, 302 r/w 149 of IPC is hereby set aside. The appellants/accused are hereby acquitted of the charges levelled against them for the above said offences.