STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. KOTRESH NAIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred by the State challenging the judgment of acquittal passed by the III Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Ballari sitting at Hosapete in S.C. No. 5016/2015. The respondent being the accused in the said case faced trial for the offences punishable under Sec. 504, 506 and 307 of Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The prosecution case is based on a report made by one Rama Naik-PW1 about the incident that took place on 24/6/2014. Ex. P.1 is the report of PW1. He reported to the Police that about four years prior to 24/6/2014, his father entered into an agreement with the accused for purchasing two acres of land in Sy. No. 421 of his village for a consideration of Rs.80,000.00 per acre and paid advance amount of Rs.50,000.00 at that time. He undertook to pay balance amount at the time of registration of the sale deed. Later on the accused further received Rs.25,000.00 from his father. In the meantime the accused was sent to jail in connection with a criminal case and therefore he and his father took possession of the said land and started cultivating it. After the accused came out of jail, he demanded the accused to execute the sale deed, but he did not take interest in it. About three days prior to 24/6/2014, he sowed pearl millet in the land. PW1 came to know that at about 6 p.m. the accused had gone to the land and destroyed the entire sowing. At about 8 a.m. on 24/6/2014, he and his father questioned the accused near Gangabai hotel as to why he had destroyed the entire sowing. At that time the accused is said to have pushed his father down; when he and his mother interfered for the rescue of his father, the accused threatened to kill them and then stabbed his mother-Savitribai PW6 on her abdomen portion which resulted in the intestine oozing out. Immediately the injured was shifted to hospital. PW1 later on went to Police Station at about 12.30 p.m. to report about the incident. The Police held investigation and charge-sheeted the accused.

(3.) The trial Court charged the accused for the offences punishable under Sec. 504, 506 and 307 of IPC. Assessing the evidence of 13 witnesses examined by the prosecution, the trial Court came to the conclusion that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and thereby acquitted the accused. Hence, this appeal.