STATE Vs. KRISHNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondents (hereinafter referred as accused 1 to 8') were tried and convicted for offences punishable under sections 143, 454, 448, 323 & 506 r/w 149 IPC and also for an offence punishable under section 2 of the Karnataka Prevention of Destruction and Loss of Property Act, 1981 (for short, 'the Act'). Therefore, they were before I -appellate court in Criminal Appeal No. 277/2007. The learned Judge of I -appellate court on re -appreciation of evidence, acquitted accused 1 to 8 of aforestated/offences. Therefore, State is in appeal before this court. I have heard Sri B. Visweswaraiah, learned HCGP for State and Sri P. Chandrashekar, learned counsel for accused.

(2.) THE accused were tried for aforestated offences on the following allegations: - -

(3.) THE learned trial Judge accepting evidence of injured witnesses and other independent witnesses held accused. guilty of aforestated offences. The learned Judge of I -appellate court on re -appreciation of evidence has held that evidence of PW1, PW2 & PW4 is highly interested. There was dispute regarding management of school between accused No. 1 on one side and PW1, PW2 & PW4 on other side. On the date of incident viz 01.06.2005, admission of students to school was going on. Accused No. 1 being President of Babu Jagajivanram High School had gone to supervise the process of admission. Therefore, allegations of mischief and trespass are false. The injured witnesses have given inconsistent evidence. The evidence of other independent witnesses does not inspire confidence. The allegations of mischief and destruction of properties of school are not proved by prosecution.