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) 1151

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
K. Somashekar, Shivashankar Amarannavar, JJ.
Bomma @ Bavaralal - Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 807/2017 C/W Criminal Appeal Nos. 801/2017 and 806/2017 In Crl.A. No. 807/2017
Decided On : 18-07-2022

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant ; Sri Hasmath Pasha, Senior Counsel, Sri Kariyappa N.A, Advocate.; Sri Vijayakumar Majage, Addl. SPP, for the Respondent

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 120-B, 143, 147, 148, 149, 302, and 115 - Conviction for conspiracy and murder - The accused, charged with multiple offences, sentenced to varied terms including life imprisonment for the murder of Hassainer - Evidence indicated prior enmity and organized assault by the accused. (Paras 1-2, 8, 30)

(B) Evidence - Credibility of eye witnesses - Testimony of eye witnesses confirmed by circumstances, and motive established through prior conflicts; presence at the scene supported by corroboration from independent witnesses. (Paras 10, 11, 31)

(C) First Information Report - Admissibility and delays - The court found the explanation for delays in filing FIR credible and did not deem discrepancies fatal to the prosecution's case. (Paras 20, 24, 25)

Facts of the case:
The case involved a violent encounter where the deceased, Hassainer, was mortally injured by a group of assailants due to prior personal conflicts. The complainant witnessed the aftermath and lodged a complaint.

Findings of Court:
The court affirmed the lower court's findings, establishing the conspiracy and coordinated attack on the deceased, supported by witness testimony and credible evidence of intent.

Issues: The issues revolved around the credibility of witness accounts, the validity of the FIR, and the presence of motive behind the assault.

Ratio Decidendi: The accused were correctly identified and implicated based on consistent eyewitness testimonies and forensic evidence linking them to the scene. The court found no reasonable doubt regarding the motivations or circumstances surrounding the assault.

Result: Appeals dismissed; conviction and sentence confirmed.

Table of Content
1. overview of case filings and convictions. (Para 1 , 3 , 9)
2. arguments contesting evidence and witness credibility. (Para 4 , 5)
3. precedents cited regarding witness reliability. (Para 11 , 14 , 20)
4. procedural validity of fir registration. (Para 21 , 22)
5. final judgment affirming lower court's decision. (Para 30 , 31)

JUDGMENT

1. Crl.A. No. 801/2017 is filed by accused Nos. 1 and 8, Crl.A. No. 806/2017 is filed by accused Nos. 2 to 5 and Crl.A. No. 807/2017 is filed by accused No. 6. These appeals are filed by the respective accused challenging the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the trial Court in S.C. No. 10028/2016 by the V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Shivamogga, sitting at Sagar whereunder the accused Nos. 1 to 6 and 8 are convicted for the offence punishable under Section 120 -B of IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 5 years and to pay fine of Rs. 3,000/- each; accused Nos. 1 to 6 and 8 are convicted for the offence punishable under Section 143 of IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 3 months; accused Nos. 1 to 6 and 8 are convicted for the offence punishable under Section 147 IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 1 years; accused Nos. 1 to 6 and 8 are convicted for the offence punishable under Section 148 IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 2 years and accused Nos. 1 to 6 and 8 are convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 25,000/- each. They are further convicted for the offence punishable under Section 115 IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 7 years and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/- each. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

2. Since all the three appeals arise out of the same judgment, they are taken up together for passing common judgment.

3. The gist of the prosecution case is that the complainant is a resident of Neharu Nagar of Sagar town. His fourth son Hassainer was working in cloth shop in Bengaluru and about 6 months back he had returned to Sagar and was doing fish business with him. In October 2014 there was a quarrel between his son Hassainer and his friends Amazad, Muzamin and Sukka and residents of Armanekeri of Sagar town and his son with his friends assaulted Mohammed Ali and Ismail Shariff with chopper and in this regard there was a case registered against his son and his friends who were sent to jail. After the said incident Mohammed Ali and Ismail Sharif were waiting for an opportunity to kill his son and his friends. On 20.03.2015 at about 08.30 pm complainant was in his house, someone came and informed that someone had assaulted his son Hassainer near Sharavathi Cold Drinks on B.H. Road. Immediately he went there and saw that his son was already taken to the hospital. Hence, he went there and saw that his son was severely injured. On enquiry his son told him that said Mohammed Ali, Ismali Sharif, Pratap, Rakesh, Imran, Bomma, Rahil and their persons assaulted him with deadly weapons when he was standing near Sharavati Cold Drinks house. Thereafter the said Hassainer died on the way to Shivamogga Hospital. The said complaint came to be registered in Sagar town P.S. in crime No. 56/2015 for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 218, 149, 302 of IPC. The Police, after investigation, have filed charge sheet against accused Nos. 1 to 9 for the offence punishable under Sections 115 , 143, 147, 148, 149, 302 and 120-B IPC. Since accused No. 7 was a juvenile, his case was tried before the Juvenile Justice Board. The learned Sessisons Judge framed charges for the offence punishable under Sections 120 -B, 143, 147, 148, 149, 302, and 115 IPC. The prosecution had examined P.W.1 to P.W.15 and got marked Ex.P.1 to P.39 and M.O.1 to M.O. 33. The accused were examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. and they have

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