AMOGI Vs. STATE THROUGH RURAL P.S.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Appeal is filed by the accused against the judgment of conviction dated 3rd December 2010 passed in Sessions Case No. 186/2009 by the Fast Track Court -I/II, Bijapur. Case of the prosecution briefly stated is, 'the complainant Laxmibai is the mother of the accused Amogi. Complainant, her husband/deceased and her three sons including the accused were residing under one roof. They are shepherds. The deceased Sayappa used to stay in the house and was given to alcohol: in his intoxicated condition, he used to abuse and assault his wife and children. Though his sons advised him many times not to consume alcohol, he did not heed to their advice. On 6.6.2009, the sons had gone to graze the sheep. Complainant alone was in the kitchen. The eldest son/accused Amogi came home in the middle of his work: at that time, the deceased was sitting in front of the house, he was drunk. On seeing the accused, he started shouting at him. Immediately, the accused reciprocated by throwing his axe towards the deceased, which hit the head of the deceased. There was severe bleeding. The deceased collapsed. The complainant started shouting immediately. The brother of the deceased and inmates of their house came there. By that time, the deceased had breathed his last. The incident occurred at about 6.00 p.m.: the complainant informed the matter to the elders in the locality. On their advice, she lodged the complaint on the next day afternoon i.e., at 12:30 hours of 7.6.2009.

(2.) AFTER investigation, the Investigating Officer filed charge sheet against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 304 of IPC. On committal, the Sessions Court framed charge for the offence punishable under Section 304 of IPC. The accused pleaded not guilty and entered into trial.

(3.) SRI . Nandakishore Boob, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant submits that, absolutely there was no evidence before the Sessions Court to convict the accused for the offence punishable under Section 304 IPC, including complainant, all the material witnesses turned hostile. Barring the evidence of the official witness/Investigating Officer, there was nothing incriminating against the accused. The reason assigned by the trial court to reach its conclusion is arbitrary and non -judicious. The learned Sessions Judge has acted on the basis of the voluntary statement of the accused leading to recovery and the medical evidence, which by itself is not sufficient to fasten the liability of the offence against the accused. The judgment of the trial court is infirm, not legal and deserves to be set aside.