LAWS(KAR)-2009-11-26

THAVAREPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Decided On November 17, 2009
THAVAREPPA Appellant
V/S
STATE OF KARNATAKA RESPONDENT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE material facts of the prosecution case-discloses that one Krishnappa (deceased) is aged about 15 years studying 8th Standard. P.W. 1 is the complainant and father of the deceased. THE respondents are accused 3 to 5 before the Trial Court. Accused 5 is the brother of accused 3, accused 4 is the son of accused 3. Accused 1 is one Suresh Lamani, son of accused 3. Accused 2 is the juvenile and nephew of accused 3. THE deceased had illicit relationship with the daughter of accused 3. THErefore all the accused persons were bearing grouse against the deceased.

(2.) ON 21-2-2002, A2 went to the house of deceased and took him to the house of P.W. 16 for sleeping together. The said fact is witnessed by P.W. 5-mother of the deceased. P.W. 1 goes to the house of P.W. 16 to call the deceased to have meals. The deceased informs that he has already taken meals and that he would sleep in the house of P.W. 16 along with A2. ON the intervening night of 21-2-2002 around 1.45 a.m. all the accused went to the house, A2 wielding axe deals blow on the neck of the deceased and all of them. While returning to their house about 50 feet from the house of P.W. 16 notice P.W. 8 who had got up to attend calls of nature. The accused persons informed P.W.8 that because of illicit relationship they have killed the deceased.

(3.) THE P.Ws. 1, 8 and 9 have supported prosecution case. Evidence P.W. 8 disclose that around 1.45 a.m. in the night on 22-2-2002 when was awake to attend the calls of nature the accused were passing by house and they told him that they have killed the deceased because of the illicit relationship. P.W. 8 immediately went and informed PW1 about the incident. P.W. 9 states that upon hearing the cries he we the scene and found the accused assaulting the deceased. Evidence P.W. 9 becomes doubtful to be believed. Because the presence of P.W.9 at the scene as an eye-witness to the incident is not referred to and mentioned in FIR and also in the Inquest report. THE statement of PW9 is recorded by the Police almost 15 days after the incident.