GOVINDEGOWDA T.K. Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals are filed by the appellants/accused Nos.1 and 2 against the judgment of conviction dtd. 8/9/2016 and order of sentence dtd. 16/9/2016 passed by the II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Hassan in S.C.No.208/2014 wherein, the learned Sessions Judge convicted accused No.1 i.e. appellant in Crl.A.No.1856/2016 for the offence punishable under Sec. 307 of IPC and Sec. 3 r/w Sec. 25 of the Indian Arms Act and directed him to undergo life imprisonment and also to pay a fine of Rs.40,000.00 in default, to undergo 2 years imprisonment for the offence punishable under Sec. 307 of IPC and simple imprisonment for a period of one year and also to pay a fine of Rs.5,000.00 for the offence punishable under Sec. 3 r/w Sec. 25 of the Indian Arms Act in default, to undergo one year simple imprisonment. In so far as accused No.2 i.e., appellant in Crl.A.No.1671/2016 is concerned, he is convicted for the offence punishable under Sec. 3 r/w Sec. 25 of the Indian Arms Act and to undergo imprisonment for a period of one year and also pay a fine of Rs.5,000.00 in default, to undergo one year simple imprisonment.

(2.) The brief facts of the prosecution case are that, the Yasalur Police of Sakaleshpura Taluk, Hassan District registered the FIR against accused No.1 i.e., Dayananda for the offence punishable under Sec. 307 of IPC and Sec. 3 r/w Sec. 25 of the Indian Arms Act and subsequently, during the course of investigation, accused Nos.2 and 3 were also implicated in the crime based on the voluntary statement of accused No.1. It is alleged in the complaint that there was enmity between CW.1 & accused No.1 in connection with village temple affairs. With that grudge, accused No.1, with an intention to take away the life of CW.1, has fired CW.1 i.e., PW.1 while he was having dinner at his house. The bullet passed through window glasses of the house of PW.1 and the same has caused grievous injuries to the head of P.W.1 and also caused simple injuries to his right arm, back and right shoulder. As such, a complaint has been lodged by PW.1-injured and the FIR came to be registered for the offence punishable under Sec. 307 of IPC against accused No.1. During the course of investigation, it revealed that the bullet which fired from the gun belongs to accused No.3 and accused No.2 handed over the same to accused No.1. As such, with their common intention to do away with the life of PW.1 i.e., CW.1, accused No.1 fired bullet from that gun. Hence, accused Nos.2 and 3 also got implicated in the crime during the course of investigation for the offence punishable under Sec.

(3.) r/w Sec. 25 of Indian Arms Act and also Sec. 30 of the Indian Arms Act. Before the committal Court, the charges were framed against the accused for the offence punishable under Sec. 307 of IPC r/w Secs. 5 , 25 and 30 of the Indian Arms Act. Though the charges read over to the accused, they denied the same and claimed to be tried. 3. Before the trial Court, in order to bring home the guilt of the accused, the prosecution in all examined 20 witnesses as PW.1 to PW.20 and also got marked 32 documents as Exs.P1 to P32 and MOs.1 to 7. However, the accused neither examined any witness on their behalf nor produced any document. The defence of the accused is one of total denial and that of false implication.