SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
M.M. Punchhi & K. Jayachandra Reddy, JJ.
Shivalingapppa Kallyappa & Ors. - Appellants
versus
State of Karnataka - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 105 of 1987
Decided on 31.8.1994
Counsel for the parties:
For Appellants - S.S. Javali, Sr. Advocate.
P.R. Ramasesh, Advocate - For the Respondent - M. Veerappa, Advocate.

Headnote:(i) Evidence. Appreciation - Two deceased met homicidal death and P.Ws. 2 to 4 A-1 received injuries in same occurrence - Evidence of injured assumes great importance and unless there are strong grounds the same can-not be rejected on basis of minor discrepancies. (Para 6)

       (ii) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 147, 148, 302/149 - Unlawful assembly and its common object - Depends upon various factors A-1 & A-2 though armed with axes did not use to the sharp side but gave only one or two blows on the heads of two deceased with butt ends - A-4 & A-5 armed with sticks dealt blows only on legs & hands which were not serious - A-3 did not participate in attack on deceased - Common object cannot be said to cause murder but can be held to cause grievous hurt - A-1 & A-2 are to be held liable for their individual acts and their conviction upheld u/s. 302, I.P.C. A-3 to A-5 along with A-1 & A-2 held guilty u/s. 326/149, I.P.C. -A-3 awarded 3 years and A-4 & A-5 awarded 7 years imprisonment.

       (Paras 9 & 10)

       Result: Appeal of A-1 &A-2 dismissed & A-3 to A-5 partly allowed.

JUDGMENT

K. Jayachandra Reddy, J. – This is an appeal under Section 2 of the Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act read with Section 379, Cr. P.C. All the five accused (original accused Nos. 1 to 5) in the case are the appellants. They were tried for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 302/149 and 326/149, I.P.C. The trial court acquitted them. The State preferred an appeal and the High Court reversed the order of acquittal and convicted the accused for the said offences and sentenced them accordingly. The prosecution case is as follows:

2. Basappa son of Shankarappa Bagewadi and Murigeppa son of Dundappa Bagewadi, the two deceased persons in the case, the accused and the material witnesses are all related to each other. A-1 to A-4 are the residents of Village Mathur and A-5 is a resident of Village Kankanwadi, lamkhandi Taluk, Bijapur District. A-I to A-4 are the sons of one Kallyanappa and the two deceased persons were the sons of brother of Kallyanappa. A-5 is a friend and neighbouring cultivator of A-1 to A-4. Kallyanappa and his brothers divided the joint family properties and got separated a long time back except with regard .to the land in Survey No. 25. In the year 1975 when the Land Reforms Act came into force giving the rights of the cultivating tenants, Kallyanappa whose name had been entered in the record of rights as tenant of the said land, started claiming exclusive occupancy rights and made an application by himself for the grant of occupancy rights. He also started threatening his other brothers, filed a suit and obtained temporary injunction against them. The other brothers also made applications for the grant of occupancy rights in their names. By an order dated 13.10.1981, the Land Tribunal held that the brothers should be the joint tenants of the land and accordingly granted the occupancy rights in their favour. Thereafter, according to the prosecution case, the two deceased; their brothers and their uncles occupied the land forcibly, erected a nut in the land and started cultivating the same. There was a standing crop in the land. On 25.12.1981 the two deceased and their brothers and some others, in all 10 persons, went to the hut in the land in occupation of A-1 and threatened him not to cut the sugarcane crop or make any changes in the said land and while going away, they also threw away the articles in the hut. A-1 then went to the Police Station at Banahatti and made a complaint before P.W. 15 Head Constable Shivappa and a case was registered. P.W. 15 went to the Village and apprehended four of the ten persons named in the complaint. Later in the evening sometime before sunset while the deceased Murigeppa and P.Ws. 2 and 4 remained in the field, P.W. 1 and two others went to the village to bring food for others. At about 9 or 9.30 P.M. they returned to the land will the food. At about midnight when P.Ws. l to 3 were still sitting warming themselves near the fire, the two deceased and P.W. 4 were lying down on the ground feeling sleepy in front of the hut erected by them, A-1 to A-4 accompanied with A-5 went there armed with axes and sticks. AI and A-2 were armed with axes and A-3 to A-5 were armed with sticks. While A-1 assaulted deceased Murigeppa with the butt end of the axe, A-4 and A-5 assaulted P.Ws. 2 and 4 with the sticks in their hands. A-1 and A-2 also assaulted deceased Basappa and P.W. 3 with the butt end of the axes in their hands. P.W. 1 managed to run away and stood behind a tree and witnessed the occurrence. After so assaulting, the accused left the place. P.W. 1 came back to the scene of occurrence and found that the two deceased persons and P.Ws. 2 to 4 had sustained injuries. He went to the Village, informed his mother P.W. 7 and others, went to the Police Station and orally complained to P.W. 15, the Head Constable who reduced the complaint into writing. On the basis of the same, P.W. 15 registered the crime and issued the F.I.R. He went to the

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