T. DEVARAJA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the appellants, who are arrayed before the Trial Court as accused 1, 2, 3, 9, 10, 11 and 13, respectively. In all, there were 23 accused before the court below. They were residents of Ibasapura Village, either belonging to Vokkaliga community, Achar community or the Ganiga community. It is stated that one Ramu who was examined as PW -9, was a member belonging to the Scheduled Caste and was visiting his father -in -law at Ibasapura village. He was said to be attending masonry work.

(2.) IT is alleged that on 6.5.1999 at about 6.00 p.m., PW 9 is stated to have been noticed helping a dumb girl by lifting the head load. She belongs to an upper caste. It is alleged that the accused persons who had witnessed PW 9 -Ramu, had mistaken his conduct as being an attempt to molest the girl who belonged to their community It is alleged that accused 13, 23 and 8 had sent word through PW 6 -Talavar Anjinappa, who also belonged to Scheduled Caste, to secure Ramu before them. PW 6 -Talavar Anjinappa therefore, had gone in search of PW 9 to his house. But having not found him, he had come to report the matter to the accused. In the meanwhile, accused 12, 13, 14 and 23 are said to have accosted PW 9 and had dragged him to the Panchayath Katte. They had beaten him and kicked him and threatened him to leave the village. It is claimed that PW 9 escaped from them. In the meanwhile, PW 6 who was on the way was accosted by accused 12, 14 and 23 and snatched the stick from the hands of PW 6 and he was assaulted with the very stick. Therefore, PW 9 and PW 6 had brought the matter to the attention of one Suresha, the complainant who was convener to "Karnataka Dalitha Sangha" at Devanahalli and since he was espousing the cause of the Scheduled Caste people and helping them to hail their grievance before the competent authority.

(3.) ON the next day, it is claimed that PWs. 1, 2 and 8 Manjunatha son of PW 2 sought to report the matter to the police, went to bring a taxi to take the injured to the hospital. Accordingly, PW 8 had brought a car from Vijayapura driven by PW 11 -Pasha. The injured persons, namely, PWs. 1, 2 and 6 and other members belonging to the Scheduled Caste, namely, PW 3 -Kaiyappa, PW 4 -Arunkumar, PW 5 -Channappa and PW 7 -Anjinamma wife of PW 2 had all got into the car and proceeded towards Vijayapura. When the car reached the shop of accused No. 4 -Angadi Ramanna, all the accused are said to have surrounded the car and dragged the inmates of the car one by one and assaulted with rods and clubs, causing injuries. It is further alleged that the accused dragged PWs. 1, 2 and 7 to a nearby manure pit and thereafter had pushed him. They were all taken in a tractor to the hospital for treatment by other by -standers. From the hospital, PW 1 is said to have made a written complaint, on the basis of which the police of Vijayapura Police Station had registered a case in Crime No. 51/1999 against 19 accused persons and had forwarded the First Information Report to the Court. After further investigation by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Doddaballapura Sub -Division, charge sheet was laid against the accused. All the accused had obtained bail. Thereafter, charges were framed against the accused for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 307, 506 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3(1)(ii)(x) and (xi) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Thereafter, the prosecution had tendered witness and examined 18 witnesses in support of the case and had marked MOs. 1 to 22. The defence had tendered evidence in contradiction of the statement of PW 7 and produced Ex. D1. The accused were then examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and denied the incriminating circumstances said to be alleged against them. But did not choose to adduce any oral or documentary evidence. The Trial Court after hearing the Prosecution and the accused had framed the following points for consideration.