STATE Vs. NAGESHA, CHICKMAGALUR DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by the State is directed against the Judgment and Order dated 26th Oct. 2006 rendered by Prl. Dist. & Sessions Judge, Chikmagalur, acquitting both the accused-respondents who were charged and tried for the offences punishable under sections 302 read with section 34 and 201 read with section 34 IPC. It was on the allegations that the accused committed murder of Seshappagowda, assaulting him with wooden club on his head and concealed his body, tied with 2 stones, in the river with an intention of screening themselves from legal action. The case of the prosecution briefly stated is that the deceased and the accused were in inimical terms. P.W. 1 Smt. Savitha, P.W. 5 Diwakara and C.W.10 Kumari Vanita are the wife, son and daughter of the deceased. The father of accused no. 1 is maternal uncle of the deceased. All were residents of the same village. 2 years prior to the occurrence there was a quarrel between the deceased and the father and uncle of accused no. 1 on account of removal of fence put up by the deceased adjoining to their lands. Accused no. 1 and his father also had quarrel with P.W. 1 and her deceased husband over their cattle having grazed in their lands. A month prior to the occurrence a theft of sandal wood tree, next to the house of the deceased, had taken place and in that connection the deceased had filed a complaint against accused no. 1, his brother Boba, one Shashidhara and Sundresha with the forest officials.

(2.) Defence propounded by the accused in the course of trial was of total denial.

(3.) The prosecution in the course of trial, examined as many as 13 witnesses and produced several documents including different panchanamas and autopsy report to bring home guilt of the accused. The prosecution case is upon circumstantial evidence. The circumstances brought on record, to connect the accused with the alleged murder and causing disappearance of the evidence are motive, recovery of Nos. 12-20, and recovery of the dead body at the instance of accused. The trial Court having found that the alleged motive was weak and there exist lot of inconsistencies/discrepancies in the evidence of material witnesses held that the prosecution has failed to prove the charges leveled against the accused and proceeded to acquit them vide judgment and order dated 26th Oct. 2006. Hence this appeal is by the state against acquittal.