LAWS(KAR)-2021-12-85

CHANNAKESHAVA SWAMAIAH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Decided On December 20, 2021
Channakeshava Swamaiah Appellant
V/S
STATE OF KARNATAKA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The accused in C.C.No.471/2005, who suffered an order of conviction for the offence punishable under Sec. 326 of IPC and ordered to undergo simple imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs.5,000.00 out of which Rs.4,500.00 is ordered to be paid as compensation for PW-4 - injured, which was confirmed in Crl.A.No.33/2009 has preferred this revision petition.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are as under:- Upon a complaint lodged by the complainant contending that on 6/5/2005 at about 9.00 a.m., on a public road in front of the back door of the residential house of the complainant situated at Basthi Hosakote village of K.R. Pete Taluk, CW-2 Roopa was talking with the accused. On seeing the same, the complainant - Cheluvaiah, the father-in-law of CW2- Roopa questioned CW2- Roopa as to why she is conversing and on that juncture, on account of past ill-will nurtured by the accused, he picked up a quarrel and abused the complainant and also all of a sudden assaulted the right ear of the complainant with a club, whereby the complainant - Cheluvaiah fell down and sustained grievous injuries. The jurisdictional police registered a case against the accused for the offence punishable under Sec. 324 and 326 of IPC and after thorough investigation laid a charge sheet before the Jurisdictional Magistrate.

(3.) The presence of the accused was secured before the learned Magistrate and charge was framed. The accused pleaded not guilty and trial was held. In order to prove the case of the prosecution, the prosecution in all examined nine witnesses from PW-1 to PW-9 and relied on four documentary evidence which are marked and exhibited at Ex.P1 to P4 and the prosecution also marked Club, which was used for assaulting the complainant - Cheluvaiah as M.O.1. On conclusion of the prosecution evidence, the accused as contemplated under Sec. 313 was recorded by the trial Magistrate, wherein accused denied all the incriminatory materials. However, accused did not chose to play his version either by examining himself as witness or by filing any written submission as is contemplated under Sec. 313(5) of Cr.P.C.,