RAVI AND KASHAPPA Vs. SEDAM POLICE STATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPEAL is by the 1st and 2nd accused against the order of conviction and sentence passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Gulbarga in Spl. Case NO. 157/2004 on 7.5.2009. In all about 8 persons were charge sheeted for the offence under Ss. 143, 144, 148, 324, 307, 109 r/w S. 34, IPC and also for the offence under S. 3(1)(x) and 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The incident occurred on 24.12.2003 around 8.00 p.m. which was preceded by a quarrel around 4.00 p.m. between the complainant and accused Ravi in regard to metteling the road. The accused are said to have constituted into an unlawful assembly and around 6.00 p.m. once again and while Subash Neelalli and Nagendrappa were taking tea, accused persons holding deadly weapons, using words taking the name of the caste as 'madiga sule makkale' and that they have become more egoistic and it has become too much on their part, threatened to take away their life. Accused assaulted one Subhash by an axe on the neck and caused bleeding injuries and accused Nagendrappa assaulted the complainant by means of a macchu causing bleeding injuries. Subhash due to the assault, became unconscious and went to coma and immediately both of them were treated in the hospital. The police, after investigation, have filed charge sheet for the above said offences. Learned Sessions Judge having framed charges against them and since they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried, examined in all about thirteen witnesses and got marked about sixteen documents. Also eight M Os were got marked like macchu, axe, etc. After the accused were examined under S. 313, Cr.PC, as their defense was total denial, learned Sessions Judge having heard the accused and the prosecution, having held that the accused formed into an unlawful assembly committed the offence, while acquitting the other accused, held only accused 1 and 2 as guilty of the offences and also convicted them for the offence under Ss. 324, 326, IPC. For the other offences they are acquitted against which, this appeal by accused 1 and 2.

(2.) HEARD the counsel representing the parties.

(3.) COUNSEL for the appellants submitted these accused have been convicted for offence under S. 324 and 326 IPC and since the accused are in custody for more than three months, according to the counsel, that could be treated as substantial punishment and the prosecution is not able to prove against the accused 1 -2 the offence under S. 326, IPC for which they have been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/ -.