MANOJ S/O APPU Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Criminal Appeal No.161/2013 has been preferred by accused No.3, whereas Criminal Appeal No.154/2013 is preferred by accused No.2 challenging the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the Fast Track Court No.X at Bangalore City in SC.No.615/2000, dated 30.1.2013/2.2.2013.

(2.) The brief facts of the case as per the complaint at Ex.P3 filed by Padmini Ramprasad are that she is the resident of House No.183, Kodihalli Bangalore. At about 11.30 a.m., on 28.4.2000, one Appu and his neighbour Velayudan's son Gangadhar killed his brother P.Rajendran and she was a witness to it. She has further stated that while Appu hit him several times with log of wood and Gangadhar stabbed him several times with knife. Her brother died bleeding. Later Gangadhar with blood stained knife came running towards her house. Mr.Raghu is also a witness to the said incident. On seeing him, aunty closed the door, Gangadhar hit the door with the knife and not finding it to open he ran away. Even he abused his mother and threatened to kill her. On the date of the complaint, her brother had arranged to remove the obstruction which was illegally laid by Appu in the passage to her house. Their right of way was obstructed. The dispute was that Appu had put up obstruction over the passage which they were using from several years by illegally constructing a gate and locking the same. It is further stated that her brother has gone to remove the blockage as they had no other way to move in and out of the house. The other persons who aided the murder of her brother are the family members of Appu. On the basis of the said complaint, a case was registered in crime 115/2000 for the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w. 34 of IPC. After completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer has submitted the charge sheet. The committal Court after following the requisite requirement as contemplated under Section 207 of Cr.P.C. has committed the case to the Sessions Court and thereafter the Sessions Court took cognizance and secured the presence of the accused. After hearing both the parties, the charge was framed for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 506B r/w. Section 34 of IPC and which was read over and explained to the accused. They pleaded not guilty and as they claimed to be tried the case was set down for trial.

(3.) In order to prove its case, the prosecution has examined 19 witnesses and got marked 38 Exhibits with sub-markings and also 11 Material Objects. During the course of cross-examination of the witnesses, the defence has got marked Exs.D1 to D27. The accused have not led any oral evidence. At that time, accused No.1 died and as such case against him was abated. After hearing the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the accused, the trial Court came to the conclusion that the evidence produced by the prosecution is sufficient to hold that the accused are guilty and as such accused Nos.2 and 3 are convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w Section 34 of IPC. They are acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 506B of IPC.