STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. SALIM KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE appeals preferred by the State of Karnataka assail the common judgment dated 26-3-1998 whereby the trial Court had acquitted all the accused in the 4 sessions cases that-were heard together. Though the incident was common, since some of the accused were absconding at different times those cases were separated and later on, they formed part of a common trial. The learned Trial judge has acquitted the accused principally on the ground that there are infirmities in the evidence which are virtually fatal to the prosecution and it is against this order of acquittal that the present set of appeals have been filed.

(2.) WE have heard the learned Counsel in support of the appeals at considerable length and we have also reviewed the record threadbare. We have also heard the learned Counsel who represents the respondents-accused who has again referred to various particulars of the record and both the learned Counsel have made their submissions both on facts and in law. In other words, we have undertaken a total and complete review of the record as this Court is required to do.

(3.) THERE is no doubt about the fact that the incident in question took place at about 10. 30 p. m. on the night of 29-12-1992 close the house of Celine D'silva who is PW-2 and that in the course of this incident her son who is deceased Vivian sustained injuries of some seriousness, as a result of which he died. It is also alleged that PW-1 Ivan dias sustained injuries of some seriousness in the course of the same incident and that one other person by the name of Ashok shetty was also injured. The prosecution alleges that the accused were armed with a sword, with a knife and an iron rod and that these weapons were used in the course of the assault. Various reasons have been set out in support of the alleged motive including the fact that one or the other of the accused who were young men, were alleged to have been making friendly gestures towards some of the young ladies in the localities but in our considered view, the prosecution has really failed to establish any motive. It does appear that the parties were known to each other and that they used to visit each other's house and it also appears that some minor quarrel had taken place in the preceding week.