STATE Vs. RAGHAVENDRA ALIAS RAGHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE judgment and order of acquittal dated 31.1.2009, passed by the II Additional Sessions Judge, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore, in Special Case No.101/2003 is called in question in this appeal by the State. The respondents -accused were tried for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302 and 120B r/w. Section 149 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(x) and 2(v) of SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

(2.) CASE of the prosecution in brief is that while PW.8, the Head Constable attached to Dabbaspet Police Station while discharging his duties on 7.4.2003 at 7.00 p.m., near KSRTC Bus Stand, Dabbaspet, entered the Bus Stand Campus to answer the natures call at about 7.15 p.m.; he saw a person being badly beaten by a group of people using lethal weapons such as chopper, long, club and knife, etc. in front of Traffic Controller Room; accused No.1 stabbed on the chest of the deceased Narayanaswamy with a knife and the knife remained in the chest itself; PW.8 caught accused No.1 on the spot; at that point of time, other accused also assaulted the deceased consequent upon which the deceased died on the spot; Remaining four assailants fled away in Maruthi Car bearing Regn.No.KEV -6470 which was parked nearby; the person who was held by PW.8 is by name Raghu @ Raghavendra S/o.Late Basavarappa of Machenahalli, Nelamangala Taluk; the deceased Narayanaswamy was of Gottigere Village of Nelamangala Taluk, and he was the member of Taluk Panchayat; Immediately thereafter, PW.8 came to Dabbaspet Police Station apprehending accused No.1 and gave first information before PW.33, the then Sub -Inspector of Dabbaspet Police Station at about 7.30 a.m. on 7.4.2003; the apprehended man (accused No.1) was also produced by PW.8 as per Ex.P15; PW.33 dispatched the FIR to the jurisdictional Magistrate as per Ex.P66; he formally arrested the person who was produced by PW.8; thereafter the investigation proceeded and ultimately charge sheet came to be filed against five persons by the Deputy Superintendent of Police (PW.34).

(3.) IN order to prove its case, the prosecution in all has examined 40 witnesses and got marked 87 Exhibits and 16 Material Objects. On behalf of the defence, 12 Exhibits were marked. On behalf of the Court, 3 Exhibits were marked. The trial Court on evaluation of the material on record, acquitted all the accused by giving benefit of doubt. Sri Venkatesh, learned SPP taking us through the material on record and judgment of the Court below submits that Court below is not justified in brushing aside the evidence of PW.8, who is eye witness to the incident in question; the presence of PW.8 cannot be disbelieved, inasmuch as he was on duty during the relevant time and he was posted to nearby place; PW.8 had come to Bus Stand for answering the nature's call; his evidence is supported by other eye witnesses to certain extent; the eye witnesses have also deposed about the place of incident and serious injuries sustained by the deceased; since the evidence of sole eye witness is sufficient to bring home guilt against the accused, he prays for setting aside the judgment of the Court below and for conviction of the accused. He further draws attention of this Court that there was animosity between accused No.1 and deceased and in pursuance of such animosity, the incident has taken place. The postmortem report corroborates the case of prosecution that knife was found on the chest of the deceased.