STATE Vs. MANAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THOUGH the incident alleged is one of some seriousness and we had issued notice to the accused after hearing the learned counsel on both sides, we have no option except to agree with the conclusion arrived at by the Trial Court and we shall briefly record our reasons for this.

(2.) FIRST of all, out of the injured persons only three have been examined viz. P. WS. 3, 4 and 5 out of whom one is hostile, one of them hardly speaks about any injuries and as far as the third one is concerned, his evidence is of absolutely no use to the prosecution. Strangely enough, the witnesses who ought to have been examined which includes the complainant has not been examined. What is totally unpardonable is the fact that the medical evidence is absolutely zero in so far as the doctor has not been examined, nor has the wound certificate been produced. Even if we were to accept the submissions canvassed by the learned Addl. S. P. P. that the minimal evidence on record should be relied on by the Court, it is impossible for us to record a finding with regard to how many injuries were caused, what was the gravity and seriousness of the injuries and more importantly what were the weapons that caused these injuries. To compound matters, the I. O. has also not been examined. We are not concerned with the reasons as to why this happened but in our considered view, the prosecution and whoever conducted this case cannot be pardoned for his state of affairs. According to narration this was an incident of some seriousness, the charges being of unlawful assembly, rioting and causing grievous hurt as also simple injuries to some of the witnesses and when it comes to the trial, we find that the entire case has gone by default. If this is the manner in which the prosecutions are going to be conducted in the State of Karnataka, it will lead to a very distressing situation in sofar as the immediate fall out of such acquittal orders is that the entire law and order situation will not only deteriorate bui totally break down. Times without number we have passed stricturos with regard to the quality of investigation and the manner in which these cases are conducted before the Trial Court and on this occasion, we need to highlight the latter. There is a clear legal oblinaton cast on the State to ensure that justice in the true sense is c'one. It presupposes the fact that where an investigation reveair, the commission of serious offences, all relevant material which includes witnesses, documents, property, etc. must be placed before the Trial Court and if this is not done, it is nothing short of sabotaging the justice dispensation system. Once again, we need to point out that with a record of this type, despite the best of arguments 3rd best of efforts from the learned Addi. S. P. P. at the appeal stage, that absolutely nothing can be done to reverse the order of acquittal. The record is in shambles and with this type of record, wo have no hesitation in holding that the order of acquittal records by the Trial Court will have to be confirmed, virtually by defan't. The appeal fails on merits and carde dismissed. In the circumstances of the case, the I. A. l is allowed, the delay is condoned. We direct that the State shall' pa/ a sum of Rs. 1,000/-to the learned Advocate who has appeared amicus curiae.