STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. H.S. SRIDHARA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) STATE has filed this appeal against the Judgment and Order of acquittal passed by the II Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bangalore City in S.C. No. 158/2005. Though the complaint came to be lodged against number of persons initially, the charge sheet came to be filed by the Police after investigation only against three persons viz., Lokesha, H.S. Sridhara and Shivakumar @ Kumara. Accused No. 1 -Lokesha expired on the next date of the incident by consuming poison. Thus the charge came to be framed against Accused Nos. 2 and 3 only. However during the course of trial, Accused No. 3 -Shivakumar @ Kumara also expired due to illness. Thus the judgment came to be pronounced only against Accused No. 2 -Sridhara acquitting him. Consequently, the appeal came to be filed by the State against Accused No. 2 only.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution in brief is that the deceased is the mother of the complainant. The complainant's father owns a site in the village and the said site is situated adjacent to the site of Siddagangamma (mother of the accused). Twenty days prior to the incident, Accused Nos. 1 to 3 had encroached the site of the father of the complainant by about one feet and they had commenced digging of foundation; the father of the complainant questioned the same; the accused agreed that they would remove the foundation dug by them if it is found after measurement that there is any encroachment by them; therefore the father of the complainant did not purse the matter subsequently; at about 12.30 to 12.45 p.m. on 16.9.2002 the accused with an intention to commit the murder of the deceased i.e., the mother of the complainant stabbed her on various parts of the body with knife; consequently, the mother of the complainant viz., Jayamma died during transit to the hospital. According to the complainant, the incident was witnessed by PW -3, the child witness; the complainant was informed by one Mr. Kumara while the complainant (PW -1) was taking class in the school. Immediately thereafter PW -1 rushed to the spot and found that her mother had fallen on the spot with bleeding injuries all around her body; the deceased told PW -1 and PW -6, who also came to the spot immediately thereafter that Accused Nos. 1 to 3 and others assaulted her with deadly weapons. The Police after investigation laid the charge sheet against three persons though the complaint came to be registered against number of persons including the women folk of the accused family. As aforementioned, Accused No. 1 consumed poison during the night of the date of the incident itself and died in the hospital on the next date of the incident. The accused allegedly insulted the deceased prior to her murder by using abusive language knowing full well about her caste. Accused Nos. 2 and 3 were charged for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 read with Section 34 of IPC.

(3.) PW -1 is the daughter of the deceased. She has lodged the complaint as per Ex.P1 at about 2.30 p.m. on the date of the incident before the Inspector PW -17 in front of mortuary of Victoria hospital, Bangalore. The said complaint is marked at Ex.P1. She has deposed about the motive and the oral dying declaration said to have been made by her mother. She has also deposed that on hearing the news, she went to the spot and saw Accused Nos. 1 to 3 on the spot; PW -2 is the husband of the deceased. She has deposed about the motive of the incident in question; PW -3 is the child witness who is stated to be the eye -witness for the incident in question. He is the son of PW -6. He was aged about 3 Vi to 4 years at the time of incident; PWs.4 are 5 are the eye -witnesses to the incident. They have turned hostile to the case of the prosecution in part. However, they have supported the case of the prosecution in part by deposing that Accused No. 1 had committed the murder of the deceased; PW -6 is the daughter of the deceased. She also came to the spot after hearing the news from the third person. She has also deposed about the motive and the oral dying declaration made before her. She has also allegedly saw Accused Nos. 1 to 3 on the spot immediately after the incident; PW -7 went to the spot after hearing the news and saw Accused No. 1 on the spot; PW -8 is a eye -witness, who has turned hostile; PW -9 is the witness for the inquest panchanama -Ex.P7; PW -10 is the witness for the scene of offence panchanama -Ex.P8; PW -11 is another scene of offence panch, who has turned hostile; PWs.12, 13, 14 and 15 are the witnesses for the seizure of knife at the behest of Accused No. 2 and blood stained clothes at the behest of Accused Nos. 2 and 3 and they have turned hostile; PW -16 is the police constable who took first information to the JMFC on 16.9.2002; PW -17 is the Inspector who went to Victoria hospital after hearing the news and recorded the statement of PW -1 in front of mortuary of the Victoria hospital on 16.9.2002 and came back to the Police Station and registered Crime No. 511/2002. He has investigated the crime in part; PW -18 is the doctor who conducted post -mortem examination. The post -mortem report is at Ex.P14. He has given opinion as per Ex.P15 with regard to cause of death of the deceased. Ex.P16 is the clarification on the opinion expressed by the doctor after seeing the weapon shown to him by the Investigating Officer; PW -19 is the Investigating Officer who completed the investigation and laid the charge sheet. On behalf of the defence, DW -1 is examined. He is the Head Master of the school wherein PW -3 was studying V KG during the relevant period. He has deposed that 'KG and 'U' KG classes are being taken up from 10.00 a.m. to 12.30 p.m. He has also deposed that such timings are maintained by the school since from 13 years.