YAMANAWWA AND OTHER Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 5th March 2010 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bagalkot in S.C.No.37/2009 for the offences punishable under Sections 489(B) and 489(C) read with Section 34 of IPC, wherein the trial Court has sentenced the appellants-accused to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of five years and shall pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- each for the offence punishable under Section 498(B) read with Section 34 of IPC and in default of payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for a period of four months. Further, the trial Court sentenced both the accused to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each for the offences punishable under Section 489(C) read with Section 34 of IPC and in default of payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for one month. Both the punishments shall run concurrently.

(2.) Factual matrix of the case are that on 05.01.2009 at about 3:30 p.m. when PW1 - Srishail N.Gabi, the PSI received information through telephone from PW2 - Suryakant Pattanashetti stating that he has caught a lady customer, who was trying to pass on a counterfeit currency note. Immediately, PW1 along with his staff and panchas went to the shop of PW2 and arrested said lady and also collected a note of Rs. 100/- said to have been passed on by her to the shop owner. He also drew a panchanama in that regard. On filing of the complaint by PW1, a case in Crime No.2 of 2009 came to be registered for the offences punishable under Sections 489(B) and 489(C) read with Section 34 of IPC. Subsequently, the Investigating Officer, has taken up the investigation and laid the charge sheet against the accused.

(3.) The trial Court framed charge against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 489(B) and 489(C) read with Section 34 of IPC, as wherein the accused did not plead guilty and claim to be tried. The prosecution in order to establish the guilt against the accused, examined as many as 17 witnesses as PWs.1 to 17, and got marked 14 documents as Exs.P1 to P14 and material objects as M.Os.1 to 7 and there is no defence evidence adduced by the accused as contemplated under law. The accused were also examined under section 313 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. The defence of the accused was one of total denial. After examination of the oral and documentary evidence on record, the learned Sessions Judge has come to the conclusion that the prosecution has established the case against the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. Accordingly, the Trial Court has convicted the accused for the aforesaid offences and sentenced them. It is this judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the trial Court, which is challenged in this appeal.