IN RE: S KUSUNGADU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a reference from the learned Sessions Judge of Ginjam, submitting the records in Sessions Case No. 27 of 1921, in which the jury unanimously found the accused not guilty of offences under Sections 457, 392 and 394 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Judge, considering the verdict perverse, has sent up the casa to this Court, with a recommendation that the verdict be set aside and the accused convicted.

(2.) The facts are simple. The prosecution casa is that on the 1st day of June, 1924, at night, the accused entered the house of P.W. 4, removing a thatty door, in order to enter, that, after he got into the house, P.W. 4 s wife roused him, being taken on alarm, that P.W. 4 discovered the accused and cried out, that the accused ran away and P.W. 4 pursued him and caught him. The accused then struck P.W. 4 on the head, with an iron instrument, and also with P.W. 4 s own chembu, which he had carried away. Four people came up on hearing P.W. 4 s alarm, P.Ws. 5, 6, 7 and 8 and assisted P.W. 4 in securing the accussed and he was then handed over to the Village Munsif.

(3.) The cross-examination of these witnesses does not discover any evidence of enmity between these witnesses and the accused, or of any reason why these witnesses should get up a false casa against him. The accused simply pleaded that the witness as were all animated by enmity instigated by his sister s son. Of this, there is no evidence. We can sea no reason why P.Ws. 4 to 8 should not be believed and we are satisfied that the accused was caught redhanded, having committed house breaking,in the house of P.W. 4 and abstracted from it a chembu, and, when P.W. 4 at-tempted to catch him and recover his property, the accused, in order to the carrying away of this property, caused hurt to P.W. 4, We therefore find that the accused committed offences under Sections 457, 392 and 394, Indian Penal Code, with which he is charged.