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

2022 Supreme(Kar) 29

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
K. SOMASHEKAR, P.N. DESAI, JJ.
Somashekara S/o. Mastaiah - Appellant
Versus
Vasanthakumar, S/o. Lorry Chennaiah & Ors. - Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 778 of 2014
Decided On : 08-02-2022

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Sri. N. Dinesh Rao.
For the Respondents: Sri. Shankarappa S., Sri. R. Srinivas, Smt. M. Gayathri, Smt. K.P. Yashodha - HCGP.

Point of Law : Person who wishes the court to believe in its existence, unless it is provided by any law that the proof of that fact shall lie on any particular person.

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 120(B), 143, 147, 148, 279, 304A, 504, 506(B), 302, 114 r/w 149 - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 161, 173(2), 372, 207, 208, 209, 313, 233 - Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 27, 134, 3 - Punishment for rioting - Offence of Murder - Criminal intimidation - When facts not otherwise relevant become relevant - Case of prosecution that one of village had launched criminal prosecution by filing a complaint on ground that first accused and his associates had made some altercation with him in night hours after Lok Sabha election schedule and accused persons thought that R had got the complaint registered in order to cause some harassment to them and further they sported grudge against Ramesh as he did not support Congress in Lok Sabha elections and in this background accused persons hatched criminal conspiracy to do away with R and to eliminate him and as such assembled in house of accused No.4 and due to this criminal conspiracy hatched among them they were armed with deadly weapons such as sword, machete and longs.

Finding of the Court :

Court had rightly come to conclusion by assigning sound reasons and also justifiable reasons - Therefore, under this appeal, it does not arise for call for interference as sought for by appellant / complainant by urging various grounds - Even for revisiting impugned judgment of acquittal rendered by trial Court and re-appreciation of entire evidence available on record but there is no consequences that trial Court misdirected and misinterpreted evidence of PW.10 and PW.17 inclusive of evidence of PWs.31 and 33 - Therefore, in this appeal, it does not arise for call for interference as sought for by appellant/complainant.

Result : Appeal dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

This appeal is preferred against the judgment of acquittal rendered by the trial Court in S.C.No.228/2009 dated 07.04.2014, whereby acquitting the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 143, 147, 148, 504, 506-B, 302, 114 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. The State has preferred this appeal by challenging the acquittal judgment by urging various grounds and seeks for consideration of the grounds and consequently, set aside the acquittal judgment rendered by the trial Court and to convict the accused for the offences leveled against them.

3. Heard learned counsel Sri. N. Dinesh Rao for the appellant / complainant who is present before the Court physically and also learned counsel Sri. S. Shankarappa for respondent Nos.1, 3 and 7 and so also, Smt. M. Gayathri for respondent No.8. But counsel Sri. S. Shankarappa for the aforesaid respondent accused would take care of the counsel namely Sri. R. Srinivas for respondent Nos.2, 4 to 6 who is on record.

4. Perused the impugned judgment of acquittal rendered by the trial Court which is challenged under this appeal consisting of evidence of PWs.1 to 34 and several documents got marked at Exs.P1 to 42 and inclusive of evidence of DWs.1 to 3 and contradictory statements of Mastaiah as per Ex.D1, pocket calendar of 2012 at Ex.D2, copy of inquest mahazar at Ex.D3 and copy of charge sheet at Ex.D4. These exhibits have been got market on the part of prosecution and also defence side, apart from MOs.1 to 15.

5. Factual Matrix of the appeal are as under:

It is transpired in the case of the prosecution that one Shivaramaiah of Basavanamathikere village had launched criminal prosecution by filing a complaint on the ground that first accused namely Vasanthakumar, S/o Lorry Channaiah and his associates had made some altercation with him on 23.04.2009 in the night hours after Lok Sabha election schedule and accused persons thought that Ramesh, S/o Masthaiah had got the complaint registered in order to cause some harassment to them and further they sported grudge against Ramesh as he did not support Congress in Lok Sabha elections and in this background accused persons hatched criminal conspiracy to do away with Ramesh and to eliminate him and as such assembled in the house of accused No.4 namely Raghu S/o Ganganna and due to this criminal conspiracy hatched among them they were armed with deadly weapons such as sword, machete and longs and came to circle of Basavanamathikere by using two auto-rickshaws bearing Registration No.KA-06-B-5981 belonging to the first accused namely Vasanthakumar and Registration No.KA-06-B-5401 belonging to the second accused – Nagaraju @ Autoraju. The aforesaid accused as according to the criminal conspiracy hatched among them came in auto-rickshaws at around 8.30 a.m.

6. It is further contended that first and second accused had longs in their hands and accused No.3 – Anil, S/o Krishnappa had machete and they got down from the auto-rickshaw with common intention and went to assault CW.1 who is arraigned as PW.10 namely Somashekara S/o Mastaiah who is none other than the brother of the deceased – Ramesh. PW.10 and deceased – Ramesh were sitting in front of the shop of Gangabairaiah and one accused alleged to have come forward to attack, then CW.1 / PW.10 escaped from the scene of crime and he took heel from there and accused persons alleged to have chased his brother namely Ramesh who was also about to took heel from there and the first accused alleged to have assaulted deceased - Ramesh with means of long on his right ankle part and due to that aforesaid Ramesh fell down on the ground in front of the house of Gousepeersab. It is further transpired in the case of the prosecution that the first accused alleged to have assaulted Ramesh on his head and on left hand with means of long and severing the left hand. The second accused alleged to have assaulted with means of long on left hand of Ramesh again and accused No.3 alleged to hav

          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