STATE Vs. MAHADEVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Judgment and order of acquittal passed by the Fast Track Court-I, Mysore in Sessions Case No.351/2003 is appealed by the State. The accused was charged, tried and acquitted for the offences under Sections 302 and 201 I.P.C.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that, the accused used to employ the services of the deceased for iron bar bending work; the accused did not pay the requisite wages to the deceased; on the date of the incident also i.e. on 13.07.2003 the accused told the deceased to go for bar bending work of one Mr. Gowda; the deceased refused to go for bar bending work since he had not paid the earlier wages; the deceased abused said Gowda also in his absence; in the night of 13.07.2003 the deceased along with PWs 2, 3 and 10 went to Thunder Bar situated at Saraswathipuram area of Mysore City for consumption of alcohol and at that point of time, the accused was also sitting in the very Bar and was consuming alcohol; PWs 2, 3 and 10 did not know about the accused at all; the accused called the deceased for consumption of alcohol and accordingly, the deceased went and tried to sit on the chair kept in front of the table of accused; the accused kicked the chair consequent upon which the deceased fell down to the ground; quarrel took place between the accused and the deceased; they slapped each other; the friends of the deceased tried to rescue the accused; thereafter, accused himself pacified the deceased and his friends by telling that they just like brothers and that they can settle the dispute amicably; the accused thereafter went from the spot on his motorcycle and waited near Shasta Garage; the deceased and his friends also went in Autorickshaw of PW-10. While they were proceeding near Shasta garage, the accused stopped the Autorickshaw, consequent upon which the deceased and his friends also got down from the Autorickshaw; again there was quarrel between the accused and the deceased at that point of time in front of Shasta garage; after some time the said quarrel was also pacified by the friends of the deceased; the accused took the deceased inside the Shasta garage for private talks; the accused requested the friends of the deceased PWs 2, 3 and 10 not to accompany them inside the Shasta garage and told them to wait outside Shasta garage; PWs 2, 3 and 10 waited near Shasta garage upto 11.30 p.m. but they did not find the accused and the deceased coming out from the Shasta garage; PWs 2, 3 and 10 went inside the garage to find out the whereabouts of the accused and the deceased, but they could not meet the accused and the deceased; thereafter they came back and slept in their respective houses. On the next day morning, the mother of the deceased came to the house of PW-2, 3 and 10 and asked about the whereabouts of her son/deceased Kumaraswamy; PWs 2, 3 and 10 narrated as to what has happened on the last night between the accused and deceased; on 14.07.2003, the mother of the deceased and PWs 2, 3 and 10 searched for the deceased elsewhere, but they could not get any clues of the deceased; having felt that the deceased must have gone elsewhere for work they kept quite; on 15.07.2003 PWs 2, 3 and 10 along with others again went to Shasta garage and searched for the deceased. They could able to find the chappals of the deceased; watch of the accused and blood stained stone (MOs 1 to 3) in Shasta garage. After seeing the aforementioned material objects they suspected foul play and went to the house of PW-4 (brother of deceased) and told him about the incident. Thereafter, PW-4 lodged the missing complaint before the Saraswathipuram Police Station at about 2.30 P.M. on 15.07.2003 and in the very complaint he has suspected the accused. Thereafter, the investigation started, the Police after completion of investigation laid the charge sheet against the accused.

(3.) In order to prove its case, the prosecution in all examined 16 witnesses and got marked 18 exhibits and 5 material objects. On behalf of the defence, 3 exhibits were marked from the statement of the prosecution witnesses. The Trial Court on evaluation of material on record and after hearing, acquitted the accused.