SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1995 Supreme(Kar) 426

Karnataka High Court
M.Abbas, Dakshina Kannada - Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka, Dakshina Kannada - Respondent
Decided On : 09-05-95
CRIMINAL APPEAL : 112 of 1994

Advocates:
A.B.PATIL, P.M.Nawaz, S.B.PAWIN

Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302,392,394/34 - Appellants shot lorry driver with pistol & inflicted knife injuries - Cleaner of truck was also attacked but he escaped - Cleaner, the only eye witness, not examined during trial - Mere referring to Process servers report or memo of Public Prosecutor that whereabouts of cleaner were not known will not be a substantial evidence to infere that his where about were not known - Adverse inference is liable to be drawn - Prosecution case that appellants caused murder & inflicted injuries on cleaner can not be held proved. (paras 5 & 6)

       (ii) Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 27 Recovery of incriminating articles pursuant to voluntary statements made by accused - Investigating Officer merely exhibited statements - They can not be taken as substantive evidence even recovery of properties produced by accused. (paras 7 & 8)

       Result: Appeal allowed.

MIRDHE, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal is preferred by the appellants - accused against the judgement dated 29th January, 1994 passed by the Sessions Judge, D. K. Mangalore, convicting the appellants-accused for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 392 and 394 read with S. 34 I. P. C. and sentencing them to R. I. for life for the offence under Section 302 read with S. 34 I. P. C. and sentencing them to seven years R. I. each for the offences under Sections 392 and 394 I. P. C. and also to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- each for each of the two counts for the offences punishable under Sections 392 and 394 read with S. 34 I. P. C. and in default of payment of fine amount sentenced them to undergo S. I. for six months each.

( 2 ) WE have heard Sri. P. M. Nawaz for Sri Pavin, learned counsel for the appellants - accused and the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State fully and perused the records of the case.

( 3 ) THE case of the prosecution is as follows :-That the three appellants and the absconding accused Moosa were in financial difficulties and they planned to loot a loaded lorry to get relief from their financial problems. On 23-12-1991 all of them joined near the check-post at about 6 p. m. They saw 2-3 lorries passing. At 7. 45 p. m. the mini lorry bearing No. KA-25/1264 came with load covered with tarpaulin tied with a rope, to Makka check-post, and the driver of the said lorry in order to get an entry made in the documents got down from the said lorry. Then all the four accused persons made enquiries with the driver and they learnt that arecanuts, cashewnuts, black pepper, copra and coconut oil tins were loaded in the lorry from Mangalore to Belgaum. The three appellants and Moosa boarded the said lorry stating that they were the passengers to go to Naravanthe. The driver Gururaja and the cleaner Pramod Hangarki were the two occupants in that lorry. The three appellants and Moosa were armed with pistol and knives then. When the lorry came to Maravanthe, Moosa who is the absconding accused was sitting in the left side of the driver Gururaja and to his left side accused No. 2 and thereafter accused No. 3 and lastly the cleaner Pramod Hangarki was sitting in the cabin of the lorry. When the said lorry came near Maravanthe, Moosa directed the driver to stop the lorry. When the lorry was stopped, accused No. 1 Abbas and the absconding accused Moosa attacked Gururaja. Moosa shot Gururaja on his head with the pistol. Accused No. 1 Abbas dealt blows on the right side of his neck with the knife thrice. Accused Nos. 2 and 3 stabbed Gururaja with the knives on his stomach. The accused Nos. 2 and 3 also assaulted Pramod Hangarki with the knives which they had with them. The cleaner Pramod Hangarki escaped from the accused. and ran away from the spot after jumping from the lorry. Due to the assault the clothes of the accused Nos. 1 to 3 and Moosa were blood stained. Gururaja fell on the seat in the lorry. Thereafter all the four accused dragged the driver Gururaja from the lorry and threw him on the road. They went away with the loaded lorry which was driven by Moosa. Thereafter accused Nos. 1 to 3 i. e. the appellants brought the lorry to the house of accused No. 1 and stored the goods in the house of accused No. 1 They brought the lorry to Ilanthila locality within the jurisdiction of Uppinangady police station and abandoned the said lorry. The accused no. 3 took the tape-recorder that was fitted in the lorry. Moosa took the tools, the rope and the tarpaulin. Accused No. 2 took two bags of black pepper out of the said booty and stored the same in the quarters of P. W. 14 wherein P. W. 14 had allowed the accused No. 2 to stay for a short period. Accused No. 1 attempted to dispose of the said booty by sale to some shop -. keepers at Puttur. But P. W. 16 identified 10 bags of copra that were brought by the accused No. 1 for sale as P. W. 16's Anitha Oi1 Mills Company had transported the said bags to Belgaum throu










Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top