BASAPPA BALAPPA PATIL Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A2 and A3 are the sons of A1; A3 is the wife of a1; A4 is the wife of A2 and A5 is the daughter of A1. There was a dispute between the family of the accused and the deceased with regard to the share in the yield of mango tree. The deceased was demanding a share and accused has refused to give a share. On 11. 4. 1994 at about 5. 30 p. m. , a1 and A2 with wielding clubs accompanied by A3 to A5 and one Maruthi (son of A1) (Juvenile offender) come together to the house of the deceased and call out the deceased. A1 threatens the deceased not to demand any share. When the deceased insists a share, the accused gets flared up. A1 to A3 assault PW1, the son of the deceased comes to rescue he is assaulted by A1 and A2. As a result, the deceased sustained fracture of parietal bone. The deceased in the course of treatment dies two days after the incident on account of coma and Shocked haemmorrage.

(2.) THE accused are charged for committing offences under Sections 143, 148, 302, 324 and 504 read with Section 149 IPC.

(3.) PW1 - the injured eyewitness supports the prosecution case. PW2-eyewitness and who is the resident of the village and takes the deceased to hospital for treatment supports the prosecution case. PW3 - an eyewitness to the incident, has turned hostile and does not support the prosecution case; and PW5 - is the wife of the deceased and an eye-witness to the incident has supported the prosecution case.