STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. BASAVEGOWDA ALIAS CHANDRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent-accused to this appeal was the husband of the complainant Bhagyamma and it was alleged that about 10 days after their marriage, on 30-4-1987, he took her to the Burudala Bore forest under the pretext of going for the wedding of a friend and that he threatened to kill her unless she parted with all her ornaments. Bhagyamma, finding no other option, removed all her jewellery valued at around Rs. 11,000/- and handed the same over to the accused who wrapped the same in a handkerchief and put it in his pocket. Thereafter, the accused is alleged to have assaulted her with a big stone whereupon, Bhagyamma screamed. The accused continued to assault her with his fists and seeing two other persons coming there, he ran away. Bhagyamma was thereafter taken to the town and ultimately to the hospital. The hospital sent a memo to the police and in the meanwhile, her own relations were informed and they came to the hospital. The police took down the complaint of Bhagyamma after which, they placed the accused under arrest and it is alleged that the ornaments were recovered from his possession under a Panchanama. On completing the investigation, the accused was put up for trial, was charge-sheeted and the case was committed to the Court of Session because, he stood charged with offences punishable under Section 307, IPC in so far as he had attempted to cause murder and secondly, he was also charged with an offence punishable under Section 392, IPC in respect of the robbery of the jewellery in question. The learned trial Judge, after assessing the evidence before him, held that the sole testimony of Bhagyamma was insufficient to prove the prosecution case beyond reasonable doubt principally because, the majority of witnesses had turned hostile. In this background, the accused was acquitted and the State of Karnataka has preferred the present appeal assailing the correctness of that order.

(2.) The learned S.P.P. has taken us through the evidence of PW 2 Bhagyamma. He has pointed out that the statement of Bhagyamma was recorded in the hospital shortly after the incident took place and that there is no departure from the FIR and the subsequent evidence before the Court. The learned advocate has also pointed out that Bhagyamma has very clearly deposed to the fact that the accused was not treating her well and that he had told her on the day in question that he was taking her to attend the marriage of his friend at Yarehally. On one pretext or the other, he finally took her to the forest, whereupon he picked up a stone and threatened to kill her if she did not give him all the golden ornaments. She has thereafter described the manner in which the accused assaulted her despite the fact that she had parted with her jewellery and she points out that the accused had used the stone in the assault and had caused serious injuries to her chest. Even after she raised an alarm, he continued to assault her and it is only after two persons came running there, that the accused ran away. She has also described as to how her relations ultimately came to the hospital and the police also came there. She was retained in the hospital for 7 days as an in-patient. Bhagyamma had also taken the police to the scene of offence and pointed out the stone M.O. 1 which was attached by the police. The broken glass bangles were found at the scene of offence. She has given the value of the ornaments at about Rs. 10,500/-. Bhagyamma has been cross-examined at considerable length, but nothing of any consequence has emerged in the cross-examination and at the same time, we need to record that her basic evidence remains unshaken.

(3.) The learned S.P.P. then relied on only two other pieces of evidence, the first of them being the scene of offence Panchanama on which he relied for purposes of pointing out that the broken glass bangles that were found at that spot in the forest fully support the version of Bhagyamma as also the recovery of the stone. In addition to this, the learned S.P.P. relies on the medical evidence because, he points out that the six injuries on the person of Bhagyamma fully and completely support her evidence as the injuri1es correspond to the areas where she was assaulted. The most serious of the injuries was injury No. 4 which had caused a fracture of the rib. The submission canvassed is that the medical evidence completely corroborates the oral evidence of Bhagyamma. Apart from these two pieces of evidence, the learned S.P.P. has also sought to place reliance on the evidence of recovery of the ornaments because, the prosecution has established that after his arrest, the entire set of ornaments were recovered from the pant pocket of the accused and that when he produced them, they were still wrapped in a handkerchief. Learned advocate submitted that these ornaments happen to be a necklace, earings and items of personal jewellery which would normally be on the person of Bhagyamma and the fact that they were found from the pocket of the accused would fully establish that her version regarding the manner in which the accused took them from her is substantiated.