Back
2025 Supreme(Kar) 665
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD BENCH
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM, G. BASAVARAJA, JJ.
Hanamant S/o Guraling Teli - Appellant
Versus
The State of Karnataka - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 100160 of 2022
Decided On : 06-06-2025
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : K.L. Patil, S.S. Patil
For the Respondent: M.B. Gundawade
The prosecution bears the burden to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt; inconsistencies and doubts in evidence necessitate acquittal.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 302, 307, 326, 504, 506, read with Section 34 - Conviction and sentence in a case of assault leading to death - The trial Court convicted accused based on testimonies of 20 witnesses, but the appellate court found the evidence fraught with contradictions and doubts regarding the incident, leading to an appeal being allowed. (Paras 6, 68)
(B) Burden of Proof - The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and if there are significant inconsistencies in the evidence, the benefit of doubt must go to the accused. (Paras 72)
(C) Prior Enmity - The existence of prior enmity between the parties leads to the possibility of false implication. (Paras 71)
Facts of the case:
The appellant was convicted for assaulting the complainant and his family, resulting in the death of the complainant's father. Their accounts included claims of serious injuries inflicted with various weapons. However, discrepancies arose regarding the use of certain weapons and the sequence of events. (Paras 3, 19, 61)
Findings of Court:
Upon detailed scrutiny, the appellate court concluded that the prosecution's case was fraught with inconsistencies and raised doubts about the reliability of the allegations. The trial Court's conviction was found fundamentally flawed. (Paras 68, 72)
Issues: The Court identified critical inconsistencies in witness testimonies and questioned the reliability of medical evidence presented, including the initial complaint details and recovery processes. (Paras 68, 70)
Ratio Decidendi: The appellate court stated that the prosecution must prove allegations beyond reasonable doubt, and any doubt inherently favors the accused, particularly in cases involving serious consequences like murder. (Paras 72)
Result: Appeal allowed; conviction set aside; accused acquitted. (Paras 73)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appeal against conviction (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. summary of prosecution case (Para 3 , 5 , 19) |
| 3. factual background of the incident and charges. (Para 4) |
| 4. arguments presented by the defense regarding evidence. (Para 6 , 9) |
| 5. defense counsel's arguments (Para 7 , 8 , 10 , 11) |
| 6. court's evaluation of prosecution evidence (Para 12 , 15) |
| 7. points of consideration for the court. (Para 13 , 14) |
| 8. examination of prosecution evidence. (Para 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 9. details of the complaint and its implications. (Para 20 , 21) |
| 10. testimonies of witnesses regarding the incident. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 11. statements from police and medical officers. (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34) |
| 12. post-mortem findings and medical evidence. (Para 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42) |
| 13. inconsistencies in witness testimonies and evidence. (Para 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49) |
| 14. further examination of injuries and their implications. (Para 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57) |
| 15. defense arguments regarding the incident's nature. (Para 58 , 59 , 60 , 61) |
| 16. court's observations on inconsistencies in prosecution. (Para 62 , 64 , 65) |
| 17. failure of prosecution to prove case beyond reasonable doubt. (Para 66 , 67) |
| 18. prosecution's burden of proof (Para 68 , 70 , 72) |
| 19. conclusion on the prosecution's case shortcomings. (Para 69 , 71) |
| 20. final order of acquittal (Para 73) |
JUDGMENT :
G. BASAVARAJA, J.
1. Appellant/accused have preferred this appeal against the judgement of conviction and order on sentence dated 07th February, 2022 passed in Sessions Case No.192 of 2020 by the VII Additional Sessions Judge, Belagavi, sitting at Chikkodi (for short hereinafter referred to as the “trial Court”).
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as per their rank and status before the trial Court.
3. Facts in nutshell are that the Circle Inspector of Police Raibagh Circle submitted charge sheet against the accused for offences punishable under Sections 302 , 307, 326, 504 and 506, read with Section 34 of INDIAN PENAL CODE . It is alleged by the prosecution that on 07th January 2020 at noon, beside the road situated at the land of the complainant, when witness Srikanth, after flowing water to the land, was standing, and at that time accused No.3-Mallappa coming on a motorcycle, abused him in filthy words as “Aye bosadi magane” and asked as to why he was standing beside the road and in that context, exchange of words took place between them. This was informed to the complainant by the said Srikanth. It is alleged that on the same day at about 6 PM when the complainant and CW4-Girimalla returned to house from Terdal, and while the complainant Siddappa, CW5-Srikanth were standing near their house, at that time, the accused and their father, with a common object, armed with clubs, iron rod and lead ball, came there and abused them in filthy words and accused 3 & 4 assaulted with lead ball on shoulder and back of CW4; accused No.1 assaulted with iron rod on the head and with an intention to commit murder assaulted Siddappa Satyappa Teli and assaulted CWs4 & 5 with iron rod, lead ball and clubs near the shop of CW8. It is further alleged that when CW7 came to rescue, accused assaulted on her back and CW5 escaped the assault but Siddappa sustained grievous injuries on his back, left ear and below the left knee. Accused also caused grievous injuries near the right eye and the back of the complainant and also caused grievous injuries on the right elbow, both shoulders and to the back of CW4. Accused further caused injury on the back of CW7 and also to CW5. After the incident, the complainant, CW4 and Siddappa were taken in 108 Ambulance to Harugeri for medical treatment and at on the way to Hospital, about 7:30 PM near Harugeri, said Siddappa died and the body was kept in the Government Hospital, Harugeri. Further, the injured took medical treatment in Dr. Patil's General Hospital. In this regard, a complaint came to be filed and cas
