KRISHNA REDDY Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal under Section 2 of the Supreme court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1970 read with Section 379 Criminal Procedure Code. All the original accused 1 to 6 are the appellants. They were tried for offences punishable under S. 148 and 302 read with 149 Indian Penal Code. The trial court acquitted them. The State preferred an appeal and the High court reversed the order of acquittal and convicted the appellants under S. 302/34 Indian Penal Code and also alternatively under S. 302/149 Indian Penal Code and sentenced each of them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life. Among them, A-1, A-3, A-4 arid A-5 were also convicted under Section 148 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo one year's RI and A-2 and A-6 were held guilty undersection 147 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo RI for six months. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently. The prosecution case is as follows.

(2.) All the accused, the deceased Chandrappa and the material witnesses belong to Village Chikkabanaswadi, a suburb of Bangalore City. Public Witness 2 Krishna Reddy is the elder brother of the deceased. Public Witness 3 Nagamma is the wife and Public Witness 4 Raghava Reddy is the son of Public Witness 2. Public Witness 9 Shakuntalamma is the wife of the deceased. A-1, A-3 and A-6 are the sons of one Pilla Reddy. A-2 is the son of sister of A-1, A-3 and A-6. A-4 is the son of one Papa Reddy who is their elder brother. A-5 is the grandson of Pilla Reddy's elder brother. There had been dispute between Public Witness 2 and the deceased on the one hand and the accused on the other hand in regard to a site called 'kana' situated in the village at a close distance from the residential house of Public Witness 2 and the deceased. Public Witness 2 and the deceased were claiming to be in possession of the same and the accused were claiming to be the owners. In that site Public Witness 2 was tethering his cattle in one shed and the other shed was used as a garage for parking his tractor. About three months prior to the incident in question, A-2 to A-5 assaulted Public Witness 2 and the deceased and Public Witness 2 complained to the police. But when the police did not take any action, he filed a private complaint in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bangalore which was referred to the police for investigation. Because of that, it is alleged that the accused were also threatening and abusing Public Witness 2. A few days prior to the incident, it is the case of the prosecution that in the absence of Public Witness 2, A-4 and A-5 trespassed into the cattle shed in the site and assaulted Public Witness 3. A complaint was also given to the police in respect of this incident and a case was registered against A-4 and A-5. Public Witness 2 apprehending dispossession filed a suit on 20/12/1978 against some of the accused and sought permanent injunction and interim injunction also. The application was opposed and the hearing was adjourned to 1/1/1979.

(3.) On 21/12/1978 in the morning Public Witness 2 accompanied by Public Witness 4, his own son and servant Muniswamy (not examined) went to his land at Kada Agrahara, situated six miles away from his village with the tractor to bring the sheaves of harvested ragi to the 'kana' in the village. At about 9 p. m. when Public Witness 2 alone returned to the village and was going on the road towards his house by the side of 'kana', the six accused who were sitting in a bullock cart, seeing him so going from there giggled at him and declared that today they should remove his head. Public Witness 2 went to his house and mentioned about the same before his wife Public Witness 3 and also expressed his apprehension that the accused might create some trouble after the tractor came. Public Witness 9, the wife of the deceased, who happened to be there later told about the same to the deceased and they were anxiously waiting for the arrival of the tractor. At about 11 p. m. they heard the sound of the tractor and PWs 2, 3 and 9 and the deceased came out of the house and stood at the door of Krishnappa. Soon after parking the tractor in the shed, Public Witness 4 along with servant Muniswamy came out. Immediately all the accused appeared on the scene armed with spears, sickles and crowbars and chased Public Witness 4 and the servant. Seeing this the deceased went ahead saying that he would ring up to the police. A-3 held him and stabbed him with bharji and thereafter all the accused surrounded him. A-6 instigated and the remaining five accused went on assaulting the deceased with the weapons in their hands. On hearing the sound of tractor, PWs 5 and 6 came out of their house and Public Witness 7 who was sleeping in ashop of his son-in-law and others came out and witnessed the assault. When assault was going on, Public Witness 3 went running from the rear side of the house to telephone to the police. After assaulting the deceased when the accused moved towards the house of Public Witness 2, PWs 2, 4 and 9 went inside the house and bolted the door. When Public Witness 3 was going towards the road leading to Subbaiahanapalya, one Kamalanabha Reddy, Public Witness 11 met her and enquired as to why she was going so at that odd hours and she told him that the deceased was being assaulted and she wanted to inform the police on phone. Public Witness 11 told her that he would inform the police and asked her to return. Accordingly Public Witness 3 returned and Public Witness 11 went on his motorcycle to the house of one C. Muniyappa and rang up to the police control room and informed that a big galata was going on in the village at about 00. 05 hrs. (i. e. 5 minutes past midnight) when Public Witness 13, Sub-Inspector of Police, received the phone message, he made an entry to the effect that there was a serious clash between two parties in Chikkabanaswadi and required urgent police help. He gave wireless message and informed K. R. Puram Police Station. On receipt of the phone message, Public Witness 14, the SHO made an entry and directed Public Witness 10 to inform PSI, Public Witness 16 and the police party reached the village in the van at about 12.30 a. m. Public Witness 19 PSI saw the dead body of the deceased lying in the vacant site along with the weapons spear, sickle, club and knife. He also found four pairs of chappals lying scattered. Soon people collected and Public Witness 2 identified the dead body as that of his brother. Public Witness 19 questioned Public Witness 2 and recorded his complaint Ex. P-3 and endorsed the same and sent the same to the police station for registering the crime. The crime was duly registered. Meanwhile the Circle Inspector of Police, Public Witness 20 also reached the scene of occurrence and instructed Public Witness 19 to continue the investigation. Public Witness 19 after the daybreak examined PWs 1 to 4 and held the inquest and seized the articles and sent the dead body for post-mortem. The Doctor, Public Witness 8, who conducted the post-mortem, found 14 injuries, three of them were stab wounds and the remaining were chopped wounds and abrasions. Only injury Nos. 13 and 14, the stab wounds were on the vital parts. The Doctor opined that the death was due to shock and haemorrhage as a result of multiple injuries and injury No. 14 by itself was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. The accused were arrested and after completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet was laid. The plea of the accused has been one of denial.