IMRAN Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor appearing for the State.

(2.) It is the case of the prosecution that on 3rd Sept. 2009, the accused, who was a driver, was said to be proceeding in a lorry loaded with machinery along with a relief driver. They were proceeding from Cochin to Delhi. When they were on National Highway No. 13, within the jurisdiction of the Basavana Bagewadi Police Station, Vijayapura District, it transpires that a sudden quarrel erupted between the accused and the relief driver since he is said to have advised the accused not to drive at a higher speed and that they could save diesel if the lorry was driven at a moderate speed. This is said to have enraged the accused and it is said they started to quarrel and in the heat of the argument, the accused is said to have stabbed the deceased in his abdomen. Further, it transpires that there was another lorry following the said lorry, which also was belonged to the same transporter, driven by PW2 who was accompanied by yet another relief driver CW6 and a cleaner CW7. Upon the lorry being driven by the accused having been stopped, the second lorry also stopped and PW2, and CWs 6 and 7 had come up to the cabin of the lorry driven by the accused and heard the heated argument going on between the accused and the deceased. Thereafter, they had entered the lorry and inquired as to what was wrong with them and it is stated that they learnt about the reason and just then the accused is said to have stabbed the deceased causing an injury. It is PW2 and CWs 6 and 7 who had separated them and immediately decided to take the injured to hospital for treatment. Thereafter, since the lorries were from Haryana and they were not familiar with the local area, they sought the help of PW9 an owner of the dhaba in the vicinity, and he had assisted them in contacting the jurisdictional police and also calling for an ambulance which is said to have come and picked up the injured. It further transpires that it was when the injured was being taken to hospital, that he had succumbed to the injury. In this background a case was said to have been registered against the accused and he was taken into custody. On the matter being committed to the Sessions Court, charges having been framed, the accused having pleaded not guilty and having claimed to be tried, the prosecution had examined 17 witnesses and marked several documents as per Exhibits PI to PI9 and material objects. On the basis of which the Court below had framed the following points for consideration:

(3.) The Court below has answered the same in the affirmative and convicted the accused to life imprisonment, apart from imposing a fine of Rs. 50,000.00. It is that which is under challenge in the present appeal.