Point of Law: When evidence of eye-witnesses are not trust worthy to believe, then motive place an important role to prove guilt of accused.

JUDGMENT :

1. These two appeals arising out of the common judgment passed in SC No. 50/2014 dated 30.03.2016 by the I Additional District and Sessions Judge and concurrent charge of I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kodagu, Madikeri (sitting at Virajpet).

2. Criminal Appeal 879/2016 by the convicted accused Nos.1 to 3 is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed in SC No. 50/2014 dated 30.03.2016 by the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, wherein accused Nos.1 to 3 sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-each for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC. Further, they sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence punishable under Section 109 read with Section 34 IPC. Further, sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence punishable under Section 120B read with Section 34 IPC and also sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month and to pay fine of Rs.500/-in default, to undergo imprisonment for one month for the offence punishable under Section 34 of IPC.

3. Whereas Crl.A.No. 2118/2016 is preferred by the State under Section 378(1) and (3) of Cr.P.C. to set aside the judgment and order dated 30.03.2016 passed by the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, in SC No. 50/2014, insofar as it relates to acquitting the accused for the charges under Section 5 of the Arms Act which is punishable under Section 27(1) of the Arms Act, 1959 read with Section 34 of IPC and thereby, to convict and sentence the accused for the offence punishable under Section 5 of Arms Act, which is punishable under Section 27(1) of the Arms Act read with Section 34 of IPC.

4. The brief facts of the prosecution case in these appeals are as under:

On 17.04.2014, at about 3.55 p.m. within the limits of Virajpet Town Police Station, in Navanagara, Perumbadi of Arji Village, due to ill-will between the deceased in this case, one Nousheer and accused No. 1 i.e. appellant No. 1-Pushpesh, accused Nos.1 to 3 with a common intention of committing the murder of the deceased went in Kharishma Motor vehicle bearing Regn.No. KA 45/R-5333 and while the deceased Nousheer was going to his house, accused Nos.1 and 2 restrained him near the house of CW.6-Raman and assaulted the deceased on his head, face, neck, shoulder and both hands with sickle causing grievous injuries to him and thereby, committed his murder. Accused No. 3 facilitated accused Nos.1 and 2 to commit the murder of the deceased-Nousheer by giving information to accused Nos.1 and 2 about the movements of the deceased. Hence, PW.23, one of the relatives of the deceased lodged the complaint before the respondent-Nagara Police Station, Virajpet, Madiker, as per Ex.P.43, against accused Nos.1, 2 and one Sampath and Ramesh. The same has been registered in Crime No. 52/2014 dated 17.04.2014 by the said Police against accused Nos.1, 2 and one Sampath and Vinay for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 114, 120B read with Section 34 of IPC as per Ex.P.42 by PW.28, the then PSI of Nagara Police, Virajpet. Thereafter, submitted the FIR to the jurisdictional Magistrate. Subsequently, the said Police during the course of investigation, recorded the statements of the PWs.22 and 23, the relatives of the deceased and visited the scene of occurrence, drew up spot mahazar, apprehend the accused and after collecting necessary document and other evidence, laid the charge sheet against these appellants i.e. accused Nos.1 to 3 for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 120B, 341, 302, read with 34 of IPC.

5. On committal of the case to the Court of Sessions, the appellants/accused pleaded not guilty for the charges level