EARAPPA S/O RANGAPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appeal is by the accused against the order passed by the Fast Track Judge, Raichur in SC 81/2008 convicting and sentencing the accused for the offences under Ss.323, 307 IPC r/w S.34, IPC and sentencing accused 1 to 3 for the offence under S.307, IPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- and default sentence of month simple imprisonment.

(2.) According to the prosecution, accused are brothers. There is a well belonging to them and they are collecting water to their respective lands for cultivation by rotation. About two months prior to the incident, there was a verbal exchange between the complainant and the accused persons regarding sharing of water. On 13.7.2008 around 11.00 a.m., when the complainant went to his land for taking water, accused have raised a quarrel with the complainant stating that it is their turn to take water to their land and questioned as to why complainant went there. Thereafter, the complainant left the place. On the same day around 10.00 p.m the complainant along with his wife was sitting near Anjaneya Swamy temple of Rajalabanda village. When the elders of the village were discussing about Brahmayya Devara jatra, the accused persons who came there started abusing and insulting using vulgar language and in fact, expressing to finish of the complainant and so saying, the 2nd accused Kareppa dragged the complainant by holding his hand and assaulted him with his hands on the back of the complainant. At that time, the 3rd accused Narasareddy assaulted on the left cheek of the complainant. The 1st accused Earappa assaulted with an erkala kudugol on the head of the complainant and also on the forehead and caused bleeding injury and also assaulted on the right cheek on the back and thereby attempted to commit murder of the complainant. According to the prosecution, CW 6 - Thimmalamma and CWs 2-5 are the witnesses to the incident. It is also stated but for the interference of elders there accused 2-5 would have finished of the complainant. After committal of the case by the Magistrate for the aforesaid offences and since the accused denied the charges, trial was held. In all, twelve witnesses were examined and fifteen documents were got marked along with MOs 1-2. After examining the accused under S.313, Cr.PC, since their defense was total denial, after hearing the arguments, taking into consideration the evidence of witnesses on record, having held that prosecution was able to prove the case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt, the trial court convicted the accused for the offence under S.307, IPC and sentenced as noted above. Hence, this appeal. Heard the counsel representing the parties.

(3.) The points for consideration are whether the prosecution has proved the case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt for the offence under S.307, IPC; whether the trial court is justified in holding that the accused attempted to commit the offence of murder of the complainant and what order.