STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. MANGMANT FAKIRAPPA SARAJAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals are filed by the State of Karnataka against the judgment of the High Court of Karnataka. There are altogether 12 respondents before us. All of them were tried for offences punishable u/ Ss. 148, 302/149, 325/149, 323/ 149 and 336/l49, Indian Penal Code. The trial Court convicted A-2, A-3, A-4, A-7, A-8, A-11 and A-12 under Ss. 148, 302, 325 and 323/149, Indian Penal Code. The rest were acquitted. The convicted accused preferred an appeal and the State questioning the acquittal of the other accused also filed an appeal. Both the appeals were disposed of by a common judgment. The High Court, after appreciating the evidence and contentions advanced on behalf of the convicted accused, as well as on behalf of the State, however, confirmed the acquittal of A-1, A-5, A-6, A-9 and A-10 and also set aside the conviction of the other accused under S. 302, Indian Penal Code and acquitted them of all the charges, except A4, A-7 and A-8 and their conviction in respect of minor offences and sentence awarded thereunder were only confirmed. Questioning the same, the State has filed these two appeals.

(2.) The prosecution case is that one Shankaragouda of Ugargol village married to one Yallava, expired leaving behind two daughters, viz., Balavva and Durgavva. One of the daughters Balavva was married to a person of Manpur and Lurgavva -- another daughter was married to a person of Unabal. His second wife, Parvatevva the widow of Shankaragouda had no issue living. After the death of Yallavva --- the first wife, Shankaragouda married to Parvatevva who had been suffering from paralytical stroke. Shankaragouda requested one Ramangouda (P.W.21), a relative, to take Parvatevva -- his second wife, to Hubli for treatment and accordingly he took her to Hubli. Shankaragouda in the meanwhile bequeathed his property in favour of the wife of A-1 under a will and he executed a general power of attorney in favour of A-1.

(3.) P.W. 20, Ramangouda came back to the village and Parvatevva, the second wife of Shankaragouda wanted to take Ramangouda to Belgaum to meet the Superintendent of Police and she finally lodged a complaint stating that her husband's life was in danger. The Superintendent of Police forwarded the complaint to the local police - the PSI (P.W. 34). A Panchnama was taken and arrangements were made to send Shankaragouda to the house of Parvatevva. Shankaragouda then annulled the will and executed a fresh will. He also cancelled the general power of attorney made in favour of A-1. This led to misunderstanding. Shankaragouda expired on 31-12-75. There was a grudge going on between P.W. 20 and A- 1 and as a result of which two parties came into existence in the village - one led by A-1 and the other by P.W. 20. The party belonging to P.W. 20 consisted of P.Ws. 2, 3, 6, 11, 12, 13 and others. The other remaining accused were alleged to be members of A-1's party. On 21-4-1977, at about 2 p.m. P.W. 3 stood in front of the house of A-1 and started abusing him. P. W. 1 took P. W. 3 away from that place and went towards Paraveshwar Temple and left him there. A- 1 was armed with a revolver, A-7 with cycle chain and others were armed with sticks and also with stones etc. There a clash took place and it is stated that A-2 gave a blow with the handbar and when Parasappa, one of the deceased persons, was running, all other accused, including the respondents chased him, overtook him and ultimately beat him with deadly weapons. P.W. 16 -- the police constable on seeing the incident rushed to the spot and all the accused ran away on seeing him. Then, P.W. 16, the constable went to the village to send a telephonic message to the police. When P. W. 16 reached Bennikatti, he found Nagappa, the other deceased, who was already assaulted near the temple. It is alleged that the accused attacked Nagappa and in that occurrence three witnesses P.Ws. 11, 12 and 13 were there.