SIIANKARAPPA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Referred Trial and the connected batch of Criminal Appeals arise out of Sessions Case No. 10/8 of 1957 on the file of the Court of Session, Medak Division. The seven accused, who are the appellants herein were tried on charges under section 302 read with section 34 and under sections 147, 324 and 326, Indian Pens.1 Code. The learned Sessions Judge acquitted all the Accused under section 147 and convicted all of them under sections 302, 324, 326 and 307 read with section 34, Indian Penal Code. Under section 302 he sentenced A-1 to A-5 and A-7 to death and to a fine of Rs. 5 each, and A-6 to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 5. Under section 326 each of the accused was sentenced to 8 years' R.I. and a fine of Rs. 5 ; under section 307 each of them was sentenced to 7 years' R.I. and a fine of Rs. 5; and under section 324 each of them was sentenced to 2 years' R.I. The sentences of imprisonment were directed to run concurrently. The facts of the prosecution case are as follows : P.W. 7 is the Police Patel of the Village of Marayampur. For sometime prior to the occurrence there had been ill-feelings between him and the accused. The accused set fire to his hay-rick. On a complaint preferred by him, the Police filed a case of mischief against the accused and the case stood posted to 12th October, 1956, in the Munsif-Magistrate's Court at Bidar, which is 8 miles from Marayampur. P.Ws. 2, 3 and 4 were cited as witnesses for the prosecution in that case.

(2.) On the morning of 12th October, 1956, P.W. 7 accompanied by P.Ws. 2, 3 and 4, his syce Sidramayya and one Kalia, set out from the village at about 6 A.M. to attend the Court at Bidar. At the outskirts of the village there is the temple of Vir Bhadrappa. P.W. 7 went inside the temple and had 'darshan' of the deity. All the six then proceeded towards Bidar. P.W. 7 was on horseback while the remaining five were following him on foot. When they had gone about two furlongs from the village, they noticed ten persons sitting in front of a hut in the field known as 'Chambal Adi' which belongs to A-4- The group of ten consisted of the seven accused and three absconding accused by names Sangram, Shivmurthy and Shiv Raj. On seeing P.W. 7 and his party, the ten persons rushed towards them. A-1 and the three absconding accused rushed at P.W. 7, while the remaining six turned towards P.Ws. 2 and 3. Sidramayya cried out that they had been deceived. Sangram fired with his gun at P.W. 7. The latter urged his horse and galloped away unhurt. Then A-1 and the three absconding accused joined the other six. In the meantime A-4 struck P.W. 3 on the head with the butt of an axe while A-7 dealt a blow on his shoulder with a stick. P.W. 2 went to P.W. 3's rescue. Thereupon A-2 struck P.W. 2 on the head with an axe. Shivmurthy struck P.W. 2 on the forehead with an axe. A-3 dealt a blow with a stick on the mouth of P.W. 2, knocking out two of his upper teeth. A-6 also gave a blow with a stick on P.W. 2's right forearm causing a fracture of the bone.

(3.) At that stage Sidramayya went to P.W. as rescue, whereupon A-5 clasped his arms tightly round Sidramayya. A-4 aimed a blow with his axe at Sidramayya but the blow fell on A-5's hand. A-1 then dealt a blow with an axe on Sidramayya's neck and Shivmurthy followed it up by striking a blow with an axe on his leg. When Sidramayya fell down, all the ten assailants are alleged to have belaboured him. Sidramayya died shortly thereafter. P.W. 2 had fallen down unconscious. P.W. 3, who had received only a small injury on the head, and P.W. 4 who was not injured, then ran to the village and informed P.W. 7 of what had happened. P.W. 7 immediately went to the scene of occurrence and saw Sidramayya lying dead and P.W. 2 lying injured. He posted a village servant to watch the corpse and had P.W. 2 removed to his house. Between 9 and 10 A.M. he got a report of the occurrence written by P.W. 9. P.W. 7 then sent for his brother-in-law, Manik Rao, from Hasnoor, which is 4 or 5 miles from Marayampur; and after the latter arrived, the report was sent through him at about 3 P.M., to the Police Station at Hatnur which is 8 or 9 miles distant, and the report was received at the Police Station at 7 P.M. That report is Exhibit P-4- Therein the broad features of the incident are narrated and ten persons, viz-, the seven accused and the three absconding accused, are mentioned as the assailants and the names of P.Ws. 2, 3, 4 and 7 find a place. The prosecution examined five eye-witnesses to substantiate its case, and they are P.Ws. 2 to 5 and 7. Of these P.Ws. 2 and 3 were themselves injured in the course of the incident, while P.W. 4 was also going to Bidar to attend Court. P.W. 5 claims to have witnessed the occurrence from a field close to the scene of offence. P.W. 7 claims to have seen six of the accused surrounding P.Ws. 2 and 3 and all the tea assailants surrounding the deceased as he was riding away on his horse at full speed.