IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF APRIL, 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA
AND
THE HON9BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RACHAIAH
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.96/2018
BETWEEN:
1.
SATISH @ KUMAR,
S/O LATE MOHAN,
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,
R/AT WALPARAI ESTATE,
COIMBATTOOR TALUK AND DISTRICT,
TAMILNADU 3 641 012.
2.
ANTHONY @ GURU,
S/O LATE RAMANNA,
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
R/AT JAYAMMA9S HOUSE,
NEAR ILALAGI MARAMMA TEMPLE,
CHANDAPURA, ANEKAL TALUK,
ATTIBELE HOBLI,
BENGALURU,
NATIVE OF KAMANABAVI LAYOUT,
HOUSE NEXT TO CHURCH,
CHITRADURGA 3 577 501.
3.
PRADEEP@ KUMARA NAIKA,
S/O SIDDA NAIKA,
AGED ABUT 26 YEARS,
2
R/AT SHANKARANAHALLI VILLAGE,
THITTAGERE HOBLI,
ARASIKERE TALUK,
HASSAN DISTRICT 3 573 103.
... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI SOHANI HOLLA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY RAILWAY POLICE STATION,
BENGALURU 3 560 001,
REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BANGALORE 3 560 001.
&RESPONDENT
(BY SRI VIJAYAKUMAR MAJAGE, SPP)
---
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 374(2)
CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF
CONVICTION DATED 16.11.2017 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL
CITY
CIVIL
AND
SESSIONS
JUDGE,
BENGALURU
IN
S.C.NO.585/2011 - CONVICTING THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED
NO.1 TO 3 FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS
307,302 AND 333 READ WITH 34 OF IPC, ETC.
THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON
30.03.2022, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT,
THIS DAY, S. RACHAIAH J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
3
This appeal is filed by the appellants/accused against the
judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed on
16.11.2017 by the Principal City Civil and Session Judge at
Bengaluru in S.C.No.585/2011 whereby the Trial court sentenced
the appellants to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life for the
offence punishable under Section 302 r/w Section 34 of IPC with
a fine of Rs.10,000/- each, in default of payment of fine, the
appellants shall further undergo imprisonment for six months.
Further the trial Court sentenced the appellants to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for 10 years with fine of Rs.10,000/- each
for the offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC r/w Section
34 in default of fine. They shall undergo simple imprisonment for
six months.
Further the trial Court directed the appellants to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for five years with fine of Rs.10,000/-
each for the offence punishable under Section 333 r/w Section
34 of IPC, in default of payment of fine, they shall further
undergo simple imprisonment for six months.
4
2.
Brief facts of the case are as follows:-
The complainant was working as Assistant Sub3Inspector
of Police in Railway Police Station, Bangalore. That on
07.11.2010, at about 3.00 p.m., he has lodged a complaint with
an allegation that, some unknown persons have stabbed P.W.7
who was working as his colleague in the Railway Police Station.
It is submitted that, P.W.7 was on duty on 07.11.2010 at
the Railway Station. He received an oral complaint from some
unknown persons stating that they had been robbed by some
unknown miscreants a wrist watch and cash of Rs.100/- from
them. It is further submitted that, the unknown persons who lost
their valuable have complained to P.W.7 and sought his help to
trace the miscreants. P.W.7 had accompanied those persons and
started searching the miscreants.
It is further submitted that, the unknown complainants
have identified the miscreants and told P.W.7 & the P.W.7 has
tried to take the miscreants to the Police Station and held the
collar of the miscreants. When the miscreants were being taken
to the Police station, one of the miscreants took his knife out and
5
stabbed on the stomach of the P.W.7 and caused injury. P.W.7
even though sustained injury, held the accused firmly and tried
to drag the accused to the Police Station and again the accused
assaulted with the knife on the hand of P.W.7, as a result, P.W.7
had to lose the accused.
On seeing the assault being made by the accused to
P.W.7, one Sardarji had rushed to rescue P.W.7 and tried to
arrest the accused. In the scuffle, the Accused had stabbed on
the chest of the Sardarji, though said Sardarji sustained grievous
injury on his chest, he has managed to snatch the knife and hit
the accused.
Though the prosecution has stated, one more Sardarji had
sustained injury in the scuffle, and had taken treatment at
Commando hospital, he has not been examined.
Again the Prosecution submitted that, immediately the
staff of the Railway Police Force Police Station rushed to the spot
and shifted the injured to the hospitals, the injured Sardarji
succumbed to the injury and P.W.7 after having obtained the
treatment had survived. However, the accused have escaped
from the scene of occurrence.
6
3.
On the basis of the complaint by PW.9 Hassan Khan,
a case came to be registered in Crime No.129/2010 for the
offences under Sections 302, 307, 333 r/w section 34 of IPC.
The police have conducted investigation and filed the
charge sheet against the accused persons for the above said
offences.
4.
On committal being made by the Magistrate Court,
the Sessions Court framed the charges against the accused
persons for the above said offences and read over and explained
in the language known to the accused persons. The accused
persons after understanding the said charges have denied the
charges and claimed to be tried.
5.
In order to appreciate the case of the prosecution,
the prose
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.