STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. PADMARAJA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is by the State challenging the judgment and order of acquittal dated 21.10.2013 passed in Crl.A.No.64/2010 on the file of the Principal Sessions Judge, Udupi District, Udupi, reversing the judgment and order of conviction dated 20.11.2010 passed in C.C.No.3311/2009 on the file of the II Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC, Udupi.

(2.) The case of the prosecution in brief are as under:

(3.) The prosecution in order to substantiate its case, examined in all 11 witnesses and got marked 10 documents and MOs.1 to 5. The accused in support of their defence, got marked documents at Exs.D-1 and D-2, while cross-examining the prosecution witnesses. The accused were examined and statements of accused were recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. The accused specifically denied all the incriminating evidence attributed against them. The Trial Court after examining the material on record, was of the view that the evidence of PWs.1 and 3 who are the eye witnesses would establish the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. The Trial Court was of the view that the evidence of PW.3 corroborates the injuries sustained by the complainant and his evidence is in terms of the injuries mentioned in Ex.P-7 - wound certificate. The Trial Court has also referred to the evidence of PW.3, wherein he has identified all MOs. before the Court. The Trial Court has also referred to the evidence of Investigating Officer, who has deposed before the Court in regard to conducting the spot mahazar and seizure mahazar. The evidence of the Investigating Officer in regard to drawing spot mahazar at the place of incident as shown by PW.2 and the wooden clubs seized would establish the case of the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt. The Trial Court relied on the judgment in the case of Shamsuddin and Others vs. State of M.P . reported in 2004 (1) Crimes 158 (SC) and by applying the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court, has proceeded to convict the accused on the premise that the evidence of the victim inspite of some minor variations would not take away the credibility of injured witness and that cannot be a ground to discard the intrinsic value of the evidence. By applying the above said principle, the Trial Court has proceeded to convict the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 143 , 147 , 148 , 323 and 326 r/w 149 of IPC .