JUDGMENT :

The appeal in Crl.A.No.420/2020 relating to appellant/accused No.1 namely Annappa K B with regard to the judgment rendered by the Trial Court in S.C.No.10015/2018 and whereby convicted the said accused for the offence punishable under Sections 302 of IPC, 1860.

2. Whereas the appeal in Crl.A.No.12/2021 is filed by the State by challenging the acquittal judgment rendered by the Trial Court in S.C.No.10015/2018 dated 30.12.2019 in respect of the aforesaid appellant/accused No.2 namely Vinayaka .K.A., relating to the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 114 read with Section 34 of IPC, 1860.

3. The aforesaid appeal arises out of the same judgment in S.C.No.10015/2018, but in respect of accused No.2 is concerned, the State has preferred an appeal and seeking intervention relating to the acquittal judgment rendered by the Trial Court and seeking to convict the accused for the charges leveled against him. Insofar as accused No.1 Annappa K B who is an appellant in the connected appeal and whereby seeking intervention by considering grounds urged therein and setting aside the judgment of conviction rendered in S.C.No.10015/2018 and seeking acquittal of accused No.1 for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC, 1860. However, these appeals are arising out of the same impugned judgment in S.C.No.10015/2018. Therefore, they are disposed of through this common judgment.

4. Heard the learned counsel Sri. B. Ravindra for accused No.2/respondent in Crl.A.No.12/2021 and so also the learned counsel Sri. C.H. Hanumantharaya for appellant/accused No.1 in Crl.A.No.420/2020 respectively and common argument as addressed by the learned Addl. SPP for State in both these appeals respectively as rank of the appellant/State in Crl.A.No.12/2021 and so also representing the State as rank of the respondent in the connected appeal. Perused the judgment rendered in S.C.No.10015/2018.

Factual matrix of these appeals are as under:

5. It is the case of the prosecution that there was an ill-will developed in between the deceased Ganapthi .K.B. and the accused persons who arraigned as accused Nos.1 and 2. But the accused No.1 Annappa K B and also the deceased Ganapthi K B are the sons of Basappa. The ill-will developed between the deceased and also with his brother who is arraigned as accused No.1 relating to taking of electricity from the T.C. which was taken by accused No.1 and his other brothers whereby situated in the land bearing Sy.No.55 of Belanduru, Mailarikoppa village of Sagar Taluk. The accused No.1 was refused to share the electricity supply with the deceased Ganapathi K B and he was always making some altercation with him that he should not take power from T.C. situated in the land bearing Sy.No.55. But the deceased Ganapathi K B has no right either drawing/taking power supply to his borewell from the said T.C. Since the crop grown in the land of deceased Ganapathi K B has almost dried for want of water to the said crops. The deceased who has forced the accused No.1 who is his brother to share the power supply and he was also made some arrangement to take the power supply from the T.C. situated in the land bearing Sy.No.55 with the help of CW.10 who is an electrician on 05.01.2018 at around 8.30 a.m.

6. It further transpires that at that time, accused No.1 Annappa K B alleged that he made some quarrel with the electrician and send him back. After deceased Ganapathi K B who tried to take the power connection which has owned by putting ladder to the said T.C. at that time, accused No.2 namely Vinayak K A who is none other than the son of accused No.1 Annappa K B in the aforesaid case had come to the spot for grazing cattle. He has picked up quarrel with the deceased Ganapathi K B and abused him in filthy language as alleged and also in support of his father who is arraigned as accused No.1 to remove the ladder which was put by the deceased Ganapathi K B as he is making some illegal attempt to take the electricity from the T.C. which bel