NAGAPPA FAKIRAPPA GOUDAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Original accused Nos. 1 to 6 are the apellants. They were tried for offences punishable under Ss. 148 and 302/149, I.P.C. and were convicted and sentenced to two years R.I. and life imprisonment respectively. The appeal preferred by them was dismissed by the High Court. Hence the present appeal.

(2.) The appellants, the deceased one Basavannappa son of Channabasappa and the material witnesses belong to village Aralikatti District Dharward. P.W. 7 Shivanandappa is the younger brother of the deceased. Their another younger brother used to look after the kirana shop situated in the village. The family had also agricultural lands and a garden. There were ill-feelings between the accused persons and the deceased in view of the earlier instances. A day prior to the present occurrence there was also an altercation between the deceased and A-6 in the house of P.W. 8 who was a Sub-Post Master in the said village. The younger brother of the deceased used to wake up early, go to the garden land, take bath and then attend to the business in the shop. Channabasappa and the deceased used to look after the agricultural establishments and they had a jeep also. On 28-7-79 just prior to 8 a.m. the deceased proceeded towards the garden land to see whether the pump was working properly. P. W. 1, Kariappa, a resident of the village at that time had gone to a tea shop. The deceased asked P.W.1 to accompany him to the garden land. On the way they met Channabasappa and P.W. 7. However, P. W. 1 and the deceased proceeded to the garden land and there they eased themselves. After the supervision of the land, P.W. 1 and the deceased proceeded towards the village. When they were near a milky bush, A-1, A-3, A-4 and A- 5 emerged from behind the bush and A-2 and A-6 came from another direction. A-1, A-3 and A- 5 had clubs, A-2 had an axe, A-4 had a sickle and A-6 had a chopper. All of them surrounded the deceased and assaulted him. P.W. 1 tried to intervene but he was threatened. P.W. 1 ran up to the house of the deceased and informed Channabasappa and also P.W. 7 who was there. At that time P.Ws. 6 and 10 had gone to the house of P.W. 7 for some financial aid to spend for the next day Nagapanchami festival. Hearing the cries of P.W. 1, P.Ws. 6, 7 and 10 and others went to the spot which was not far away from the village and when they reached the spot, they saw that all the accused had surrounded the deceased who had fallen down and A-2 dealt blow with an axe on the neck of the deceased. On seeing the witnesses the accused ran away. P.W. 7 brought his jeep and he along with P.Ws. 1, 6 and 10 and others took the injured in the jeep and proceeded towards the Primary Health Unit. On the way they had to pass in front of the Police Station Haunsbhavi. There they found P.W. 14 Narayan Devisingh, P.S.I. standing. P.W. 14 stopped the jeep and saw the injured person who was unconscious. He also accompanied them in the jeep to P.W. 2 Dr. Sham, Assistant Medical Officer who after examination opined that the condition of the injured was serious and that at that time he could give only some life saving medicines and he advised them to take the injured to the Cottage Hospital at Haveri. P. W.2 also accompanied them in the jeep. On the way they also consulted another Doctor at Byadagi who examined the deceased and pronounced him to be dead. The body was kept in the mortuary room. P.W. 14 sent a wireless message to the Police Station and a case was registered and the F.I.R. was issued. Inquest was held and the dead body was sent for post-mortem. P. W. 3, the Medical Officer, who conducted the post-mortem, found a number of incised and lacerated injuries. On internal examination he found that right occipital, parietal and temporal bones were fractured and occipital, parietal and temporal lobes of the brain were lacerated. Thorax was also injured and he opined that the death was due to shock and haemorrhage as a result of the multiple injuries. The accused were arrested and after completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet was laid. The prosecution relied on the evidence of the eye-witnesses P. Ws. 1, 6, and 10. The accused denied the offence and pleaded not guilty and stated that they were falsely implicated due to enmity.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that there was delay in giving the report and that father of the deceased was an influential person and after due consultations the earliest report was brought into existence implicating these accused. His next submission is that other material witnesses like father and younger son of the deceased, the driver and the mechanic have not been examined. It is also his submission that a specific overt act is attributed only to A-2 and in respect of others the allegation is omnibus. It is also his further submission that page No. W. 1 who is one of the principal witnesses was cross-examined by the prosecution and since he being the author of Ex. P. 1 and when his evidence becomes untrustworthy, the evidence of other witnesses cannot be relied upon. Yet another submission is that page No. W. 14, the Sub-Inspector conducted himself as though he was a member of the family of the deceased and the investigation carried on by such an officer cannot be given any weight.