Back
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
(D.B.)
M.S. Nesargi & A.K. Laxmeshwar, JJ.
Balappa & Others - Appellants
versus
State of Karnataka - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 163 of 1985
Decided on 12-2-1987
Shri B.G. Naik, Advocate - For the Appellants.
Shri K.H.N. Kuranga, State Public Prosecutor-For the Respondent.
IMPORTANT POINT
Even if an Officer-in-Charge of a Police Station temporarily ceases to be an officer-in-charge -On reaching the police station again, he resumes his role of officer-in-charge.
Headnote:(i) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 -Sections 154 and 157 and rule 1196 of Mysore Police Manual in Vol. II-Whether a police officer (Officer-in-Charge of a Police Station) when out on duty can himself take the report to the Police Station and registering a case, instead of sending it through somebody, is it sufficient compliance of the requirements of law? (Yes)
Held, the said order does dot prohibit an officer on tour going to the Police Station, himself and registering the crime number, as on reaching the police station he becomes an officer-in-charge of the police station. It only lays down that after sending it to the police station for the purpose of getting it registered he will himself commence investigation. (Para 27)
Further held, that such report is in accordance with the prescribed procedure, as contemplated by the statute viz, Section 157 Cr. P.C. (Para 27)
(ii) Evidence Act, 1872-Panchanama Recording of evidence of witnesses, even if not required under law, but if it is done, it is not detrimental to the inquest. (Para 35)
(iii) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973Section 164 - In law recording of the statement of a witness by itself does not render his evidence suspect, unless there is any other material to show that an attempt has been made to create such a witness. (Para 35)
(iv) Appreciation of evidence-Effect of lack of a cogent version with all the details.
Held, it must be that he was in great mental shock at that stage. It would be unreasonable for anyone to expect a cogent version with all the details, except those which he at that time considered necessary. To expect such a person to narrate all the other overt acts of all the accused persons at such a time would not be just and reasonable. (Para 37)
JUDGMENT
Mr. Nesargi, J. - Appellants are 13 in number. Two charge sheets were filed, involving all the accused and one Bhimanagouda Desai of Hadnoor village, Taluk Shorapur, by the Kembhavi Police, alleging that they had committed offences punishable under sections 147, 148, 302 read with section 149 I.P.C. The deceased is one Siddangouda of Yevoor village situated 5.6 kms. away from Hadnoor. Bhimanagouda Desai was shown as absconding.
2. The cases were committed by two Committal orders to the Court of Sessions. Gulbarga. The Additional Sessions Judge. Gulbarga clubbed the two cases and held common trial. He re-arraigned the accused in the two cases as A. 1 to A. 13. The case against Bhimanagouda Desai was bifurcated as he was absconding.
3. The prosecution case is that there were two factions, one headed by Channareddy of Hadnoor and the other by Bhimanagouda Desai of Hadnoor. All the accused belonged to the faction of Bhimanagouda Desai of Hadnoor while the deceased, his son P.W. 1, Shankaragouda P.W. 3 a relative of the deceased. Chandrayya P.W. 4 a close relative of the deceased being his sister's son and others belonged to the faction of Channareddy. Because of this faction between the said persons, cases and counter cases and proceedings under section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and also proceedings for extradition were pending. In the year 1978 a compromise between the two factions was struck in the Office of the Deputy Commissioner and District Magistrate, Gulbarga. Thereafter no incidents of serious nature had taken place between the parties. In 1982 a Swamiji of Gadag Samsthan came to the village and brought about further understanding between the two factions. Photographs as evidenced by M. Os. 12 and 13 were taken at that time. Inspite of this truce between the two factions having been brought about in 1970 and 1982 enmity between A. 9 and the deceased continued to exist.
4. On 5-9-1983 P.W. 2 Mallinatha Reddy son-in-law of deceased, who is a resident of Hadnoor had gone to Yevoor to the house of his father-in-law-the deceased - as the mother of the deceased was ailing and he wanted to look her up. He intended to go to Hadnoor on the same day, but the people of the house of the deceased persuaded him to stay overnight and proceed on the next day. PW-2 agreed. In the early morning of 6-9-1983 PW-2 proceeded to the bus stop to go to Hadnoor. Deceased PW-1, PW-3 and PW.4, who according to the prosecution, was residing in the house of the deceased accompanied PW-2 and reached the Shahapur-Bijapur Road by 6.30 a.m. Tea shops and residential houses are situated on either side of the road. The bus-stop, it is undisputed is near Venkappa's tea shop. The situation shown in the sketch Ex. P. 27 in this respect is also not disputed.
5. It is further the prosecution case that on reaching the locality the deceased proceeded towards the manure pits situated on the northern side of the road saying that he would answer the first call of nature and return. PWs. 1, 2 and others waited near the Flour Mill of Siddanna, which is on the southern side of the road. Bus was due to arrive at about 7 or 7.30 A.M. While the deceased was returning all the accused and Bhimanagouda Desai, the absconding accused emerged from the General direction of the Tea shop of A. 8. which is situated on the northern side of the road and ran towards the deceased all along shouting at the deceased. Bhimanagouda Desai, A. 5, A. 8 and A. 9 were armed with axes. A. 3, A. 4 and A. 13 caught the deceased firmly and Bhimanagouda called upon them not to release their hold on the deceased. Bhimanagouda Desai cut with axe on the neck of the deceased, A. 9 also cut on the neck of the deceased with axe. A. 3, 4 and 13 released their grip and the deceased fell down. Then A. 5 and A. 8 cut on the bead, face, neck and other parts of the deceased. The remaining accused surrounded the deceased and assaulted. When P.Ws. 1,2 and 4 attempted to go to the rescue of the
