RANGIAH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant-accused was tried by the Sessions Judge, Bangalore Division, for an offence under Section 302, I. P. C. but was convicted under Section 323, I. P. C. and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of three months. The case against him was that on the evening of 8th June 1952 ho committed murder of one Rajagopal by squeezing his testicles near a mango garden beyond the limits of the Tumkur town. Of the three assessors, two were of the opinion that the accused was guilty while the third was doubtful.

(2.) The learned Sessions Judge fully believed the occurrence. He held that the accused had waylaid the deceased Rajagopal and had assaulted him and used criminal force against him by squeezing his testicles as a result of which he died in his house a few hours later. He found that the motive which prompted the accused to assault Rajagopal was clearly established by evidence. The deceased had assaulted the accused's son a few days prior to the date of occurrence in connection with some difference in the matter of supply of stones by the latter. There is no evidence that the accused's son was in any way seriously hurt by the deceased and it appears to have been one of those incidents which would ordinarily have been ignored. P. W. 8, Nemiraj, P. W. 11, Thoplain, P. W. 12 Chinnappa Naidu, P. W. 18 Raghunath, P. W. 22 Kariya were the eye-witnesses to the assault. The assault was apparently comparatively slight, but the accused appears to have become unduly incensed at it and owed vengeance against the deceased. He told P. W. 12, father of the deceased, that he would assault and finish his son as Rajagopal had assaulted his son. The accused expressed a similar intention before P. W. 21 who advised him not to do so and to have the matter settled by a panchayati. Subsequently P. W. 12 went to the Swamiji of Siddaganga Mutt and sought his intervention. P. W. 25 Mr. K. Shivananjiah has spoken about this. As directed by the Swamiji he sent for the accused, but the accused did not go to him. P. W. 9 Rashid, a jutka driver, was asked by P. W. 12 to warn the deceased against going to Tumkur as the accused was waiting to assault him. P. W. 12 approached the accused and begged him not to hurt his son but the entreaties apparently fell on deaf ears. The learned Counsel for the appellant did not seriously attempt to show that these facts were not true.

(3.) That the accused waylaid the deceased with a view to assault him and did so and squeezed his testicles has been conclusively established by clear and disinterested evidence of the eyewitnesses against whom nothing has been elicited. P. W. 13 Virupakshiah, p. W. 14, Shivanna, P. W. 15 Rudradevaru, P. W. 16 Sadasivaradhya and P. W. 17 Narasimhamurthy are young students who had recently passed the S. S. L. C. examination. They were returning from Siddaganga High School and on their way back they saw the deceased and the accused quarrelling. The accused caught the testicles of Rajagopal, squeezed and pulled them. Rajagopal cried out and moved slightly back. Then the accused lifted his hand to hit at the private parts of Rajagopal. P. Ws. 13, 14 and 15 then went and stood between them and pacified them and by that time Narasimhamurthy, Sadasivaradhya and Gopaliah also came there running hearing the cries of the deceased. When they went and stood between the accused and the deceased the accused told Rajagopal......... Then the accused went away towards his house and Rajagopal and the witnesses went towards the Mutt. Rajagopal was limping, clenching his teeth and Narasimhamurthy asked him why the accused had assaulted him. He said that he had assaulted the accused's son near the quarry and out of that ill-will the accused had assaulted him. When the deceased returned to his house he was very much exhausted and P. W. 12, his father, questioned him what the matter was. He said that the accused had assaulted him and squeezed his testicles near Krishna Iyengar garden and that he had much pain. He was then put to bed and the Doctor, P. W. 1 was sent for. He saw the deceased, examined his testicles and gave him a coramine injection. P. Ws. 12, 18, 19 the deceased's wife, and P. W. 1 Doctor have deposed in respect of these matters. P. W. 1 advised fomentation with hot water bottle, but a hot water bottle was not available and some fomentation was given with ^^dksyh-** The deceased was then' attempted to be removed to the Tumkur hospital in a jutka belonging to P. W. 8, but by the time he reached hospital he Was dead as spoken to by P. W. 1 the doctor who examined him. P. W. 3 conducted the post mortem examination and discovered internal injuries in the testicles and he is of the opinion that death was due to shock as a result of internal injuries to the testicles.