Back
2020 Supreme(Kar) 962
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU (KALABURAGI BENCH)
P.N. Desai, J.
Srikanth - Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 3509 of 2013
Decided On : 08-07-2020
Ishwaraj S Chowdapur, Advocate, Sharanabasappa M Patil, Advocate
The prosecution must prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt, and the benefit of doubt should go to the accused.
Headnote:
Indian Penal Code - Conviction under Section 307 - Summary of the judgment
Fact of the Case:
The case involved an incident where the accused was convicted for stabbing the victim with a knife. The prosecution alleged that the accused assaulted the victim with the intention to cause bodily injury or death.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence presented by the prosecution, including witness testimonies and medical evidence, was inconsistent and contradictory. The court also noted that the complaint filed by the prosecution was inconsistent with the charge sheet, creating doubt about the prosecution's case. The court concluded that the prosecution failed to prove the accused's intention to cause injury or death beyond a reasonable doubt.
Issues: The key issues in the case were whether the prosecution proved the accused's intention to cause injury or death, and whether the judgment of conviction was based on sound principles regarding the appreciation of evidence in criminal cases.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the prosecution must prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt, and that the benefit of doubt should go to the accused. The court highlighted the difference between 'must be true' and 'may be true' in evaluating the evidence. The court also noted that the evidence of interested witnesses, inconsistencies in the complaint, and lack of clear medical evidence raised doubts about the prosecution's case.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment of conviction, and acquitted the accused of the offence punishable under section 307 of the Indian Penal Code.
JUDGMENT
P.N.Desai, J. - This appeal arises out of the Judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Prl. District & Sessions Judge, Raichur against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 307 of Indian Penal Code sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay fine of Rs.5000/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for one year.
2. The brief case of the prosecution is that, on 26-10-2007 at about 8.00 p.m. at Hirenaganur village, when the complainant Prakashappa who is the father of injured after dinner came out of the house towards road and he found near corner of church somebody was quarreling with his son. Then he went there and saw friends of his son viz, Netiraj, Arogyappa, Dodmanappa and Vijaykumar were also present. He found there Nagareddy, Timmangouda, Mahadevappa, Hussainsab, Ningappa, Siddappa, Chandamma, Basavaraj, Antonappa, Deshappa and Hussainsab S/o Hussainab all of them were stating that, they must take away the life of this Anand and his hands and legs must be broken, at that time accused Srikant and Nagareddy took the knife and stabbed on left side ear and ran away, he tried to rescue his son, but accused threatened him stating that they will eliminate his entire family. Thereafter-words his injured son was taken by his relative Augistine and Arogyappa to Hattigold hospital.
3. In this regard on 26.10.2007 at about 21.30 hours Mahadevappa ASI received the information about incident and visited the hospital. He received the written complaint given by PW.1 Prakashappa as per Ex.P.1 and returned to the police station and on the basis of the same he registered a case in Crime No.192/2007 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324, 114, 307 & 506 R/w Sec.149 of Indian Penal Code and sent the FIR to Court as per Ex.P4. On the next day, he visited the scene of offence and drawn scene of offence panchnama as per Ex.P.5. He searched for accused and returned. In the evening at 4.30 p.m., the accused had come to the police station to lodge complaint against the injured complainant, so he arrested him. Then accused gave voluntary statement stating that, if he is taken, he will show the knife and accordingly he recorded the voluntary statement of the accused. Then he secured panchas. The accused took himself and panchas to Hirenagnur village near a land of one Hussainsab and near the bush he took out M.O.1 knife. The ASI seized the same by drawing seizure panchnama as per Ex.P.7, then he recorded the further statement of PW.1 and statements of PW.s 2 to 7. Thereafter words he handed over further investigation to P.S.I Dattataraya. PW.8 Dattataraya received the said investigation from ASI, he recorded the statement of CW.2 on 06-11-2007 at hospital and received the wound certificate as per Ex.P.3 on 02-01-2008 from Hattigold hospital and after completion of investigation he filed charge sheet.
4. The said charge sheet is filed before the learned J.M.F.C., Lingasugur for the offences punishable under sections 324, 504 & 307 of Indian Penal Code. This case is committed to the Sessions Court as one of the offence is under section 307 of Indian Penal Code, is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions.
5. Thereafter words the learned Prl. District & Sessions Judge, Raichur framed the charge only for the offence under section 307 of Indian Penal Code against this appellant/accused, but not framed any charge under sections 324 & 504 of Indian Penal Code. The accused has pleaded not guilty and claims to be tried. Thereafter words, prosecution examined eight witnesses as PW1 to PW8, got marked seven documents as Exs.P1 to Ex.P7 and got identified one material object as M.O.1 and closed its side evidence.
6. The statement of accused as required U/sec.313 of Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded. The accused has not chosen to lead any defense evidence, but Ex.D.1 to Ex.D.7 got marked during the cross-examination.
7. After hearing ar
