ARJUN Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant who is accused No.3 before the Trial Court in S.C.No.37/2008 called in question the judgment and sentence dated 17.04.2010 passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Bidar, in S.C.No.37/2008 convicting the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC and sentencing him to undergo simple imprisonment for 3 years and shall also pay fine of Rs.3,000/ - with a default clause to undergo simple imprisonment for three months.

(2.) BEFORE adverting to the grounds urged before this Court by the accused, it is just and necessary to bear in mind the brief factual matrix of this case.

(3.) IT is the case of the prosecution before the Trial Court that accused Nos.1 to 3 are close relatives to each other i.e., to say accused Nos.1 and 2 are the sons of accused No.3. Accused Nos.1 and 2 were shown as absconding accused. They were not available for the trial. It is alleged that there was some previous ill -will and hatred between the accused and the injured with regard to a site property. In this background, it is alleged that on 24.06.1998, in the afternoon opposite to children ward Government Hospital, Bidar, accused persons with a common intention have entered into the said hospital and particularly, accused No.3 (appellant herein) along with his sons i.e., accused Nos.1 and 2 went inside the said hospital and assaulted the injured by name Manik S/o Ramanna on his face, forehead, hands and leg with iron rod with an intention to cause his death. Due to the said impact of assault, the injured suffered grievous injuries and he was taken treatment in the hospital for the injuries. It is the contention of the prosecution that the police after receiving MLC report went to the hospital recorded the sworn statement of wife of the injured by name Sharanamma at 15.00 hours and registered a case for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 307 r/w Section 34 of IPC in Crime No.71/1998. The police, after due investigation, submitted charge sheet against the accused persons. Out of accused Nos.1 to 3, accused No.3 in fact secured anticipatory bail and he was on bail throughout the proceedings. After securing the accused before the Court, the Court has framed the charges against the accused for the above said offences and the prosecution in order to prove the guilt of the accused examined 11 witnesses as PWs.1 to 11, got marked the documents at Exs.P1 to P8 and material objects M.Os.1 to 3 and closed its side. The accused was also examined by the Court under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. As the accused did not choose to lead any defence evidence, after hearing the arguments, the Trial Court has recorded its finding and convicted the accused and sentenced him as noted above.