MANJULA W/O KRISHNA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed by the accused before the trial court. The facts leading upto this appeal are as follows. It was the case of the prosecution that the accused were the daughter, wife and son, respectively, of one Durgappa.

(2.) The learned counsel for the accused while taking this court through the record would seek to canvass that the only evidence on the basis of which the trial court has held all the three accused guilty is on the testimony of PW-1, as to the alleged manner in which the incident is said to have taken place. It is sought to be pointed out that the possibility of Accused no. 2 and 3 holding the accused from front and behind, while Accused no.1 was repeatedly chopping at his arm is difficult to visualize and not readily believable. For it is pointed out that a human forearm to be severed completely at the elbow joint would require precise blows to be struck with some force at the same spot. This was hardly possible with a struggling man to be made to stand still and to repeatedly strike blows, when the reflex action on the first blow and the desperate struggle of even a weak man is itself sufficient to throw off restraining hands and to elude the blows. It is further contended that Janakamma, the wife of Chowdappa is said to have thereafter come on the scene to have noticed the presence of the accused. Hence there was no other witness who was in a position to have corroborated the version of Chowdappa.

(3.) The learned State Public Prosecutor on the other hand would seek to justify the judgment under appeal.