STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KOLAR RURAL POLICE Vs. NANJUNDAGOWDA, DHARMEGOWDA, JAYARAMA AND VASANTHA BOTH S/O MUNIYAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the State is directed against the judgment and order dated 18.8.2007, passed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) and CJM, Kolar in CC. No. 417/2002, acquitting the respondent - accused of the charges levelled against them for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 504, 506 r/w Section 149 of IPC.

(2.) THE respondent - accused were charge sheeted for the aforesaid offences by the Kolar Rural Police. The case of the prosecution in brief is as under: On 31.10.2001 at about 11.00 a.m. when PW. 1 -Munegowda, PW. 2 -Manjunatha, PW. 3 -Chowdappa and PW. 4 -Chowdamma were working in their land in Yelachipura Village, Kolar Taluk, respondent - accused 1 to 4 sharing common intention, came to the land of PWs. 1 to 4 armed with cycle chain, club etc. and in furtherance of the common intention, they picked up quarrel with PWs. 1 to 4 and committed acts of assault on PWs. 1 to 4 and caused them injuries and also threatened with injury to their lives, thereby they committed the aforesaid offences. In respect of this incident, PW. 1 lodged complaint at about 2.30 p.m. on the same day based on which, the Police registered case in Crime No. 302/2001 for the aforesaid offences and took up investigation. During the investigation, the Investigating Officer visited the scene of occurrence, drew up spot mahazar as per Ex. P. 2, seized Neelagiri clubs said to have been used by the accused persons and recorded the statement of the witnesses. Before lodging the complaint, PWs. 1 and 4 had taken treatment in SNR Hospital Kolar. PW. 7 -Dr. B.S. Nagaraj who treated PW. 1, issued wound certificate as per Ex. P. 4 in respect of PW. 1. After completing the investigation charge sheet came to be filed.

(3.) THE accused persons did not choose to lead any defence evidence. The defence of the accused was one of denial and false implication in view of ill will and animosity between them on one hand and PWs. 1 and 2 on the other hand in the background of pendency of civil dispute between them in relation to the land. The learned Magistrate, on appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, by the judgment under appeal, acquitted all the accused persons of all the charges levelled against them on the ground that the evidence of PWs. 1 to 4 is full of inconsistency, discrepancy and contradictions and their evidence do not inspire the confidence of the Court nor their evidence is corroborated by any medical evidence, therefore, it is highly unsafe to place reliance on their testimony. The learned Magistrate also noticed that there is delay in lodging the complaint. Aggrieved by the acquittal of the accused persons, the State has presented this appeal.