The court confirmed that impulsive assaults leading to death constitute culpable homicide under Section 304(II) IPC, emphasizing the importance of eyewitness testimony in establishing guilt.

JUDGMENT :

M.G. UMA, J.

The appellants being accused Nos.1, 3 and 5 in Session Case No.135/2015, on the file of the learned IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi, sitting at Sedam, is impugning the judgment of conviction dated 08.09.2022 and order of sentence dated 12.09.2022 convicting them for the offences punishable under Sections 147 , 341, 304(II) read with Section 149 of INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (for short ‘IPC’) and sentencing accused Nos.1, 3 and 5 to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- each for the offences punishable under Section 147 read with Section 149 of IPC; to pay fine of Rs.500/- each for the offence punishable under Section 341 read with Section 149 of IPC; accused No.1 is sentenced to undergo partly simple and partly rigorous imprisonment for a period of 2 years 6 months and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 304(II) of IPC; accused No.3 is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period 3 years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 304(II) of IPC; accused No.5 is sentenced to undergo partly simple and partly rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 304(II) of IPC, with default sentences.

2. Facts of the case in brief are that, on 17.10.2014, accused No.2 had abused and slapped the informant-PW.1. On the same day at 2.30 p.m., the deceased-Chandrashekhar, who is the cousin of the informant, took the informant with him and questioned accused No.2 as to why he assaulted the complainant. Accused No.2 along with the other accused assaulted the deceased with their hands all over his body and also kicked on his private parts, as a result of which he fell down. When the informant tried to intervene in the matter, the accused assaulted him as well. The deceased who sustained fatal injuries, succumbed to the same.

3. PW.1 filed the first information against accused Nos.1 to 5. The FIR came to be registered and the investigation was undertaken. After completion of the investigation, charge sheet came to be filed. The learned Magistrate took cognizance of the above said offence and committed the matter to the Sessions Court. The accused have appeared before the Trial Court, pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

4. To prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined PWs.1 to 16, got marked Exs.P1 to P13 and identified MOs.1 to 5 in support of its contention. This accused have denied all the incriminating materials available on record in their statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C but have not led any evidence in support of their defence.

5. After taking into consideration all the materials on record, the Trial Court came to the conclusion that, the prosecution is successful in proving the guilt of accused Nos.1 to 5 and accordingly convicted the accused for the offence punishable under Sections 147 , 341, 304(II) read with Section 149 of IPC, while acquitting accused Nos.1, 3 to 5 for the offence punishable under Sections 504, 323 read with Section 149 of IPC. The Trial Court held that, the offence in question does not fall under Section 302 of IPC, but it falls squarely under Section 304(II) of IPC. Accordingly, it convicted the accused. Being aggrieved by the same, accused Nos.1, 3 and 5 are before this Court.

6. Heard Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri. Gopal Krishna B. Yadav, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.Perused the materials including the Trial Court records.

7. In view of the rival contentions urged by learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is:

"Whether the appellants-accused No.1, 3 and 5 have made out a case to interfer