(1.) This appeal is preferred by the appellants-accused Nos.1 and 2 being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction dated 17.07.2014 and order of sentence dated 23.07.2014 passed by the II Additional Sessions Judge, Kolar in SC No.76/2013 convicting the appellantsaccused for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC and accordingly sentencing them to undergo life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 25.000/- each in respect of the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one year.
(2.) Brief facts of the case as per the complaint Ex.P6 are that Smt. Nanjamma, the mother of the deceased filed the complaint dated 09.02013 alleging that she is residing at the address given therein and her husband Narayanappa had three brothers namely Dodda Venkataravanappa, Chikka Venkataravanappa and Nanjundappa. About 15 years back there was partition and since from that date they are living separately and cultivating their respective lands. She is having two sons namely Gurappa and Hanumappa and three daughters. Her elder son after marriage is residing in his wife's house at Shettymadamangala. After the death of her husband, herself, her younger son and his wife-Bharathi are cultivating the lands fallen to their share by digging the borewell. Her husband's brothers and their children i.e. the accused Subramani and Lokesh had filed a suit against her son before the civil Court seeking partition on the ground that the land given to them in partition is not sufficient and in that connection there is rivalry between them. Further, it is stated that recently her husband's brother Nanjundappa and his wife were not keeping well and their son Subramani had spread rumors that her son Hanamappa has played black magic to spoil their life. In that connection, her son deceased Hanamappa had told her that he could not move out in the village and had asked the complainant at 100 p.m. in the afternoon to go to the house of Nanjundappa and ask them as to why they are spreading such false rumors and she had told that she will enquire the same in the night. On the same day at about 8.00 p.m. after finishing his dinner her deceased son Hanumappa questioned as to whether she had enquired the same. By that time, he received a call to his mobile phone at 8.30 p.m. and proceeded towards the shop of Sampangi Ramashetty on his motor cycle. The complainant followed him to the shop of Adeppa to purchase banana. On hearing shouting of people near the shop of Sampangi Ramashetty, she went there. By the time she reached there, sons of her husband's brother namely the accused Subramani and Lokesh were assaulting her son Hanumappa and Sampangi Ramashetty was trying to relieve her son from the clutches of the accused, at that time, accused No.1-Lokesh assaulted her son on his stomach, chest and neck, as a result of the same, her son fell down in the shop itself and thereafter, accused- Subramani and Lokesh ran away from that place. The complainant, Sampangi Ramashetty and others gave first aid and took him to R.L. Jalappa Hospital in 108 ambulance. However, her son died on the way to the hospital. When she enquired the said Sampangi Ramashetty about the incident, he told the complainant that Subramani threw chilly powder to her son's eyes and when her deceased son ran inside the shop of Sampangi Ramashetty, Subramani and Lokesh followed him and assaulted him with knife and caused death of her son. On the basis of the said information, she filed the complaint. On the basis of the complaint, the case was registered in Crime No.9/2013 for offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC. After investigation, charge sheet was filed against the accused persons. The Committal Court committed the case to the Sessions Court. The Sessions Court took cognizance of the offence and after hearing the learned public prosecutor and learned counsel for the accused, the charge was prepared for the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC. When the charge was read over and explained to the accused, they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried and as such the matter was set down for trial.
(3.) We have head the learned counsel for appellants Sri.Nanjunda Gowda and Sri.Vijayakumar Majage, learned Additional SPP for respondent. Perused the judgment of conviction and order of sentence. We have also perused the evidence and the documents produced and also the appeal grounds.