VALSAMMA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE appeals are directed against the Judgment and Order dated 4.4.2008 rendered by the Sessions Judge, Kodagu at Madikeri, convicting the appellants/accused for the offences they were charged with. Both the appellants were charged and tried for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307 & 114 of IPC and Sections 25 & 30 of Indian Arms Act. The first appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment (RI) for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offence under Section 302 of IPC, in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. The first appellant is further sentenced to undergo RI for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offence under Section 307 of IPC and to undergo RI for six months. The first appellant is also sentenced to undergo RI for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offences under Sections 25 and 30 of Indian Arms Act, in default to undergo RI for one month. The second appellant is sentenced to undergo RI for life for the offence under Section 114 of IPC for abetment of the offence under Section 302 of IPC committed by the first accused and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to undergo RI for one year. The second appellant is also sentenced to undergo RI for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- for having abetted the crime committed by the first accused under Section 307 of IPC, in default to further undergo RI for six months. All the sentences awarded by the Court below were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution unfolded by the complainant PW.1-Sharmila in her deposition is that there was a civil dispute pending between her deceased husband and the accused persons. On 12.5.2000, at about 3 p.m. Prasanna and Jayaprakash had gone for grazing their cattle. At about 5.30 p.m. Geetha, the wife of Prasanna, went with coffee for her husband-Prasanna. At the relevant time, one Shamesh, the brother of Mythily, had come from Kerala for attending some religious function to be celebrated on the next day at Virajpet. On the fateful day, Shamesh and Jayaprakash were taking coffee, when at about 5.30 p.m. they heard loud quarrelling sound coming from the wet land where Geetha had gone to serve coffee to her husband. PW.1-Sharmila, her husband Jayaprakash and Shamesh rushed towards that direction, where they witnessed the second accused-Valsamma and her husband's brother Alexander Baby were planting Kesha plants in the wet lands which was in dispute. THEy saw accused No.2 and Alexander Baby were also fencing around the said plants. Jayaprakash and his brother Prasanna questioned accused No.2-Valsamma and Alexander Baby as to why they were fencing and planting in the disputed area of land and they removed the fence and uprooted the plants. On that count, accused No.2 rushed ferociously towards Jayaprakash and Prasanna with Kathi [sickle] in her hand. Jayaprakash, however, snatched the sickle and threw it away. Accused No.2-Valsamma, told Alexander Baby to call her husband. Accused No.2, till accused No.1 reached the scene of offence, allegedly prevented Jayaprakash, Prasanna and PW.1 from leaving the spot. Within short time thereafter, it is alleged that a gun (SBBL) shot sound was heard by all of them and that a bullet hit Jayaprakash and Geetha and they collapsed. Accused No.1 thereafter came forward. It is further alleged that accused No.2 thereafter instigated/abetted the first accused to shoot PW.1-Sharmila also. PW.1-Sharmila started running towards her house and she was chased by accused No.1. She ran towards the house and entered from the back door and while closing the back door, she was shot at by him. She also sustained injuries to her right shoulder. THEreafter, PW.1-Sharmila heard one more gun shot which killed her mother-in-law Mythily. THEn the accused fled from the scene of offence. Since Geetha, despite bullet injury, was still alive, and hence removed to the hospital. THEre she succumbed to the injuries. THE complaint was lodged with Ponnampet Police Station by C.M.Shamesh s/o Balakrishna. On the basis of the complaint lodged by him a crime was registered bearing Crime No.70/2000 against the appellants for the offences under Sections 302, 307 & 114 of IPC and Sections 25 & 30 of Indian Arms Act.

(3.) WE have heard the learned Counsel for the parties at considerable length and with their assistance, have gone through the entire materials on record.