STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. SURESHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is against the Judgment dated 12.11.2009 passed in Criminal Appeal No.58/2007 by the Presiding Officer of the Fast Track Court-V, Mysore. By the said Judgment, the learned Sessions Judge allowed the appeal of the accused and set aside the judgment and order of sentence dated 17.01.2007 passed in C.C.No.638/2005 by the learned Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC, Periyapatna, convicting the accused of the offence under S.392 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for one year and pay fine of Rs. 1,000/-; in case of default in the matter of payment of fine, to undergo S.I. for one month.

(2.) The relevant facts leading to filing of the above appeal may be narrated, in a nut shell, as follows: The case of the prosecution, inter alia, was that on 12.11.2005 in the morning, K.M.Pavithra-PW1, resident of Kaggundi Village and a student, studying in I PUC of Pushpa College at Periyapatna, as usual, was going by walk on the pathway, which runs through a eucalyptus grove, in order to go to the college. On the way, at about 08.00 a.m., by the side of the compound of Kaggundi Tobacco Board, an unknown person, having curly hair and aged about 25 to 30 years, dressed with black pant and black dull coloured shirt followed her. All of a sudden, he snatched the gold chain from the person of PW1 and ran way from the place. Owing to this unexpected event, PW1 became panic and screamed for help and then, one Harish- PW3 and another Venkatesh-PW4 came to the spot and searched for the robber, but did not succeed. In the incident, PW1 sustained injury to the neck. On the date of incident itself, she lodged complaint-Ex.P1, which was registered, investigation was undertaken and charge-sheet was filed against the accused for the offence punishable under S.392 IPC.

(3.) The accused, after appearance pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined PWs.1 to 13 and marked Exs.P1 to P5 and got identified MOs.1 and 2. Relying on the said evidence, the accused was convicted for the offence under S.392 IPC and sentenced, in the manner indicated herein earlier.