Back
- 1 -
CRL.A No. 100121 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 100131 of 2018,
CRL.A No. 100207 of 2018,
CRL.A No. 100216 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD
BENCH
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100121 OF 2018 (C-)
C/W
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100131 OF 2018
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100207 OF 2018
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100216 OF 2018
IN CRL.A. NO.100121/2018
BETWEEN
1.
BASAVARAJ MAHADEVAPPA RAMAJI
AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O: NARAYANPUR ONI,
KAMALAPUR, TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD.
2.
DEEPAK YALLAPPA SHINDHE
AGE: 32 YEARS,OCC: NIL,
R/O: KAMALAPUR
HANAMANTDEVAR,
TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD.
…APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. RAVI B NAIK, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SRI.AVINASH M ANGADI, ADVOCATE)
- 2 -
CRL.A No. 100121 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 100131 of 2018,
CRL.A No. 100207 of 2018,
CRL.A No. 100216 of 2018
AND
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY DHARWAD RURAL SUB-DIVISION,
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING, DHARWAD.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. V.M.BANAKAR, ADDL. SPP)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 374 OF
CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL BY SETTING
ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF CONVICTION AND SENTENCE
RECORDED BY THE 2ND ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS &
SPL. JUDGE, AT DHARWAD IN SPL.SC.ST.NO.33/2014, DATED
24.03.2018 & 26.03.2018 THEREBY CONVICTING THE APPELLANTS
FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 120(B), 201, 302,
364 R/W 34 OF IPC.
IN CRL.A. NO.100131/2018
BETWEEN
1.
SHRI.KRISHNA @ KITYA
S/O RAMCHANDRA GOLE
AGE: 42 YARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O: NAYANPUR ONI,
DHARWAD.
2.
SHRI.PAVAN S/O RAJU HAIBATTI
AGE: 24 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O: NARAYANPURI IONI,
DHARWAD.
…APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. RAVI B NAIK, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SRI.AVINASH M ANGADI, ADVOCATE)
AND
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BYI DY.SP., DHARWAD RURAL
SUB-DIVISION DHARWAD,
R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
- 3 -
CRL.A No. 100121 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 100131 of 2018,
CRL.A No. 100207 of 2018,
CRL.A No. 100216 of 2018
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH, AT DHARWAD.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. V.M.BANAKAR, ADDL. SPP)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/SEC.374(2) OF CR.P.C.,
PRAYED THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF CONVICTION AND
SENTENCE PASSED IN SPECIAL SC. ST NO.33/2014 FOR THE
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 364 302, 201, 120(B) R/W
34 IPC AND SECTION 3(2)(V) OF SC AND ST ACT, 1989 DATED
24.03.2018 IN CRIME NO.211/2014 ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE AT DHARWAD
AGAINST ACCUSED NO.7 AND 8 BE SET ASIDE.
IN CRL.A. NO.100207/2018
BETWEEN
1.
FAKKIRAPPA S/O BAILAPPA BYALI
AGE: 59 YEARS,OCC: AGRICULTURIST,
R/O: MANGALAGATTI,
TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD.
2.
HANAMANTHSINGH
S/O RATANSHINGH CHAWAHAN,
AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
R/O: YETTINAGUDD,
TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD.
3.
MAHAMMAD SAB S/O BABUSAB BIJAPUR,
AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
R/O: MANGALAGATTI,
TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD.
4.
REHAMAN S/O ALISAB NADAF
AGE: 27 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURAL COOLIE,
R/O: MANGALAGATTI,
TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD.
…APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. RAVI B NAIK, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SRI.J.BASAVARAJ, ADVOCATE)
- 4 -
CRL.A No. 100121 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 100131 of 2018,
CRL.A No. 100207 of 2018,
CRL.A No. 100216 of 2018
AND
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY DY.SP. DHARWAD RURAL
SUB-DIVISION, DHARWAD
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BENCH AT DHARWAD.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. V.M.BANAKAR, ADDL SPP )
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 374(2) OF
CR.P.C., SEEKING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL, SET ASIDE THE
JUDGEMENT AND ORDER OF CONVICTION DATED 24.03.2018 AND
SENTENCE DATED 26.03.2018 U/S.120(B), 201 AND 302 OF IPC
FURTHER APPELLANT NO'S 4 & 10 CONVICTED FOR THE OFFENCES
U/S.364 R/W 34 OF IPC IN SPL.SC.ST.NO.33/2014, ACQUIT THE
APPELLANTS AND SET THE APPELLANTS AT LIBERTY.
IN CRL.A. NO.100216/2018
BETWEEN
1.
SRI.MANJUNATH S/O MARUTIRAO CHAWHAN
AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O: HOSAYALLAPUR,
NAVALUR AGASI,
WALMIKI ONI,
DHARWAD.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SRINAND A PACHHAPURE, ADVOCATE)
AND
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY DY.S.P., DHARWAD RURAL SUB DIVISION,
DHARWAD, NOW REP. BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH AT DHARAWD.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. V.M.BANAKAR, ADDL SPP)
- 5 -
CRL.A No. 100121 of 2018
C/W CRL.A No. 100131 of 2018,
CRL.A No. 100207 of 2018,
CRL.A No. 100216 of 2018
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 374(2) OF
CR.P.C., SEEKING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION
DATED 24.03.2018 AND ORDER OF SENTENCE DATED 26.03.2018
PASSED BY COURT OF II ADDL. DISTRICT & SESSIONS & SPL.
JUDGE, DHARWAD IN SPL.SC.ST.NO. 33/2014 FOR THE OFFENCE
PUNISHABLE U/S. 120(B), 201, 302 AND SECTION 364 R/W
SECTION 34 OF IPC AND SECTION 3(2)(V) OF SC/ST (PREVENTION
OF ATROCITIES) ACT, 1989 AND ALLOW THE PRESENT APPEAL BY
ACQUITTING THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO. 9.
THESE CRIMINAL APPEALS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND
RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT, COMING ON FOR ‘PRONOUNCEMENT OF
JUDGMENT’, THIS DAY, SURAJ GOVINDARAJ J., DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
The above appeals are filed by the accused, who
have been convicted in Spl.SC.ST.No.33/2014 by the
II Additional District and Sessions and Special Judge,
Dharwad (for short, ‘trial Court’) vide judgement
dated 24.03.2018.
Criminal Appeal No.100121/2018 has been filed by
accused
Nos.5
and
6,
Criminal
Appeal
No.100131/2018 has been filed by accused Nos.7
and 8, Criminal Appeal No.100207/2018 has been
filed by accused Nos.1, 3, 4 and 10 and Criminal
- 6 -
Appeal No.100216/2018 has been filed by accused
No.9.
By way of aforesaid judgement, the trial Court found
accused No.1 and 3 to 10 guilty of offence under
Sections 120-B, 201 and 302 read with 34 of IPC,
accused Nos.4 and 10 were found guilty of offence
under Section 364 read with 34 of IPC. All the
accused were acquitted of offences under Sections
3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, ‘POA
Act’).
By order of sentence dated 24.03.2018, accused
Nos.1 and 3 to 10 were sentenced to undergo life
imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- each for
offences under Section 302 read with 34 of IPC, in
default to undergo simple imprisonment for one year.
Accused Nos.3 to 10 were sentenced to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for six years and to pay fine
- 7 -
of Rs.5,000/- each for offences under Section 201
read with 34 of IPC and in default to undergo simple
imprisonment for six months. Accused Nos.1 and 3
to
10
were
sentenced
to
undergo
rigorous
imprisonment for five years and to pay fine of
Rs.5,000/- each for offences under Section 120-B
read with 34 of IPC and in default to undergo simple
imprisonment for one year. Accused Nos.4 and 10
were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment
for five years and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- each for
offence under Section 364 read with 34 of IPC and in
default to undergo simple imprisonment for six
months. All the sentences were directed to run
concurrently. Accused Nos.1 and 3 to 10 were
entitled to set off under Section 428 of Cr.P.C.
5.
It is aggrieved by the aforesaid judgement of
conviction and order of sentence that the aforesaid
accused are before this Court.
- 8 -
6.
A complaint came to be filed by PW.1-Veeranagouda
Patil alleging that on 27.08.2018 at 6.00 a.m., he
found someone fallen on east face of the service road
on NH-4 near the agricultural land of Basappa
Aralikatti. He along with certain others had gone to
see the person who had fallen on the road, when
they found the person dead and stained with blood.
It is in that background that a complaint came to be
filed with PSI, Kittur Police Station to take action
against unknown persons.
7.
Investigation was completed and charge sheet was
laid by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Dharwad
Rural Police Station for offences under Sections 120-
B, 201, 302 and 364 read with 34 of IPC and 3(2)(v)
of Scheduled Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention
of Atrocities) Act 1989 (for short POA Act). Charges
were framed for the said offences.
- 9 -
8.
In order to prove its case the prosecution, in all, led
evidence of 28 witnesses and marked more than 76
exhibits. 25 material objects were also marked.
9.
When the incriminating evidence was put across to
the Accused the same was denied, which was
recorded in the Section 313 statement.
10.
Defence led evidence of one witness.
11.
The trial Court proceeded for arguments and passed
the above order of conviction and sentence.
12.
Sri.Ravi
B
Naik,
learned
Senior
counsel
for
Sri.Avinash M Angadi and Sri.J.Basavaraj appearing
for the appellants, would submit that:
12.1. The entire case of the prosecution is based on
circumstantial
evidence.
There
are
no
eyewitnesses to the alleged crime. The said
- 10 -
circumstantial evidence is not corroborated by
any cogent evidence on record.
12.2. The investigation has been done in absurd
manner and does not support the charges laid
against the accused.
12.3. Of the 28 witnesses who were examined in the
matter, except the official witness, everybody
has
