LOKI ALIAS LOKESHA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant before us who was the first accused in Sessions Case No. 216/94 before the learned IX Additional Sessions Judge, Bangalore City was convicted by the trial Court for an offence punishable under Section 302, IPC and sentenced to undergo R. I. for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default, to undergo R. I. for one month.

(2.) THE prosecution case briefly stated was to the effect that on the after noon of 10-8-1993 the P. Ws. 1, 2 and 3 along with the deceased had gone to a film show at about 2. 45 p. m. at a talkies situated in M. S. R. Nagar. Since the show had started and it was dark, the deceased is supposed to have tripped over the legs of A-1 whereupon a fight ensued between the two of them. Not only was an abusive and vulgar language was used but the deceased is also supposed to have given two slaps to A-1. P. W. 1 contends that during the interval, he made enquiries and came to know that the name of A-1 was Loki and that the three other persons with him were his friends and that they were residents of Mathikere. The accused and his friends are supposed to have left the show shortly before it ended. The deceasedafter the show got over was proceeding on a cycle whereas P. Ws. 1, 2 and 3 were walking at some distance behind. It is alleged that all of a sudden A-1 along with A-2 and the other absconding accused pounced on the deceased. While the other two persons are supposed to have assaulted the deceased with their hands, it is alleged that A-1 whipped out M. O. 3, a knife and stabbed the deceased on the abdomen. The assailants thereafter ran away from that place and P. Ws. 1 to 3 state that they looked for an autorickshaw to take the injured to the hospital and that they reported the matter to a police constable who is P. W. 11 who in turn put the injured person in an autorickshaw and took him to the Ramaiah Hospital, but he was declared dead. It is the prosecution case that on the next day, A-1 went to the police station and surrendered himself and the Duty Officer who is P. W. 8 states that he prepared a report of the surrender and that he also took charge of the blood-stained clothes and the blood-stained knife under a mahazar. On completion of the investigation, the accused were put up for trial and on completion of the trial, the learned trial Judge held that the offence under Section 302, IPC was established and convicted the appellant before us and awarded him the sentence as set out earlier. The present appeal is directed against that order.

(3.) WE have heard the appellant's learned advocate Mr. Hashmath Pasha and the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor Mr. Pinto and we have also reviewed the entire record of the case.