Back
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
K.L. Manjunath and H.S. Kempanna, JJ.
H.C. Karigowda @ Srinivasa and Others – Appellants
Versus
State of Karnataka by Holenarasipura Town Police, Hassan District - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1065 of 2008 (C)
Decided On : 4.1.2013
CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 - Section 154: [K.L. Manjunath & H.S. Kempanna, JJ] FIR - If the investigating officer deliberately does not record the FIR after receipt of information of cognizable offence registering the complaint as FIR after reaching the spot and after due deliberation, consultation and discussion, such complaint cannot be treated as FIR, it would be only a statement made during investigation and hit by Section 162.
CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 - Section 374 (2): [K.L. Manjunath & H.S. Kempanna, JJ] Appeal against conviction - Conviction and sentence under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 427, 120B r/w Section 149 of IPC - Appellants/Accused way laid the two deceased who were proceeding on motor cycle, assaulted with chopper, longs, stones - PWs-4 and 8 who came to rescue were also assaulted - Post mortem report disclosed that there were 17 injuries and the internal and external injuries were anti mortem in nature - Death was due to injuries - Evidence of PWs 3, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 17, 18, 28 and 29 supported to evidence of PWs 21 and 27 and PM report - Nothing elicited to discredit their testimony with regard to injuries - Police had earlier information of the occurrence much prior to coming into existence of FIR - In fact they had removed the two deceased to hospital - This was supported by evidence of PWs 3, 4, 10, 11, 28 and 29 - ExP-2 found to have come into existence to plant eye-witnesses who were brothers and relatives of two deceased to implicate accused - ExP-2 (FIR) was hit by Section 162, CrPC - No explanation for delay in recording statement of witnesses - Injured eye-witness PW-4 turned hostile - When evidence of direct witnesses was to the effect that deceased were assaulted which could be caused by stone - Absence of any incised injury - Long delay in recording evidence of witnesses - Two choppers were said to have been recovered when it is the case that three choppers were used - Evidence of injured witnesses who turned hostile were untrustworthy.
Held, Viewing from any angle, the evidence pressed into service by the prosecution to connect these accused with the murder of the two deceased does not inspire confidence to place any reliance on same. In that view of the matter, there would be no hesitation in holding that the prosecution has failed to establish the charges leveled against these appellants also for which they have been convicted. The trial Judge without appreciating these materials on record in its right perspective has come to an erroneous conclusion in holding that the prosecution has established that these accused are responsible for the murder of the two deceased which finding in our view being contrary to the facts, evidence and being perverse cannot be sustained and accordingly it calls for interference in this appeal.
H.S. Kempanna, J.
This appeal by the appellants/accused Nos. 1, 3 to 9 is directed against the judgment and order dated 18/22.9.2008 passed in SC No. 143/2005 by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-I, Hassan convicting them for the offences punishable under Secs. 143, 147, 148, 341, 302, 427, 120-B r/w Sec. 149 of IPC and sentencing each of them to undergo S.I. for three months for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148 of IPC, to undergo S.I. for one month for the offence punishable under Sec. 341 r/w Sec. 149 of IPC, to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- each in default to undergo S.I. for six months for the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w Sec. 149 of IPC and to undergo S.I. for three months for the offence punishable under Section 427 r/w Sec. 149 of IPC.
2. Brief facts of the case are :
Appellants along with A-10 & 11 who have been acquitted in the case were tried on the charges for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341 R/w Sec. 149, 120-B r/w Sec. 149, 302 R/w 149, 307 R/w 149 and 427 r/w Sec. 149 of IPC.
2.1 It is alleged that on 22.5.2005 at about 6-30 p.m. near the new house of PW-12 Kempegowda situated on Halekote-Kyathanahalli road within the limits of Holenarasipura Police Station in pursuance of the conspiracy hatched the previous day, all the accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapons like choppers, longs and stones the common object of which was to assault and commit the murder of two deceased Krishnegowda and Srinivasa and in furtherance of common object of their unlawful assembly when deceased Krishnegowda and Srinivasa were proceeding on the motor cycle bearing No. KA-13/Q-6888 at the said place waylaid them and committed their murder intentionally by assaulting them with chopper, longs, stones and at that time, when PWs.4 and 18 came to their rescue, they also assaulted them and caused damages to the motor cycle of the deceased in which they were proceeding and thereby committed afore-mentioned offences.
2.2 It is the case of the prosecution that deceased Krishnegowda and Srinivasa are brothers of PW-2 Jayamma, PW-3 Rangaswamy, PW-7 Thammanagowda and PW-13 Revanna. PW-5 Renuka is the wife of deceased Srinivasa. PW-10 Eshwara is the brother-in-law of deceased Srinivasa and younger brother of PW-5 Renuka. PW-11 is the son of PW3 Rangaswamy. PW-15 Lakshmamma is the aunt of deceased and mother of PW-4, complainant in the case. They are all natives of Kyathanahalli village in Halekote Hobli of Holenarasipura Taluk. Among them, PW-7 is working as Attender in Veterinary hospital at Shravanabelagola and PW-13 is residing at Hassan. It is also the case of the prosecution that the two deceased were also residing at Hassan.
2.3 It is also the case of the prosecution that A-2 who is absconding and A-3 in the case are direct brothers. Likewise, A-5 & 6 are brothers and are sons of A-4. A-7 & 8 are direct brothers. Other accused viz., A-1, 9, 10 & 11 are related inter-se to each other. Among the accused, Appellant No. 1/A-1 was working as a school teacher in Govt. Higher Primary School situated at Basavanahalli. Appellant No. 2/A-3 Rangaraju is working as driver in Milk Dairy at Bangalore. Rajegowda Appellant No. 3/A-4 was working as Attender in Animal Husbandary Department at Kyathanahalli. K.R. Babu appellant No. 4/A-5 and K.R. Dilip appellant No. 5/A-6 are settled in Bangalore, among whom A-5 is working as a lorry driver and K.G. Prasad/Appellant No. 6/A-7 is also working as a driver at Bangalore. Appellant No. 8/A-9 Pradeep who died during the pendency of this appeal had completed second year PUC at Holenarasipura Junior College. All these accused are natives of Kyathanahalli village, Halekote Hobli, Holenarasipura Taluk.
2.4 It is the case of prosecution that all was not well between the accused on the one hand and the deceased, PWs. 1 to 11, 13 to 18 on the other hand on account of the land dispute that wa
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
