Karnataka High Court
Smt.K. Sridevi W/O K. Neelakanta vs The State Of Karnataka on 3 July, 2024
Author: Mohammad Nawaz
Bench: Mohammad Nawaz
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9063-DB
CRL.A No. 100309 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JULY, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T. G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100309 OF 2019 (C)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. K. SRIDEVI
W/O. K. NEELAKANTA,
AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O: DURGA COLONY,
PATEL NAGAR, BALLARI.
2. SMT. K. PADMAVATHI
W/O. K. VEERESH
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O: DURGA COLONY,
PATEL NAGAR, BALLARI.
Digitally
signed by
GIRIJA A 3 SANTOSH @ ROHIT
BYAHATTI
Location: S/O. K. NEELAKANTA
HIGH COURT
OF
KARNATAKA AGE: 21 YEARS, OCC: WORKING IN JINDAL,
R/O: DURGA COLONY,
PATEL NAGAR, BALLARI.
4. ROSHAN
S/O. K. NEELAKANTA
AGE: 20 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O: DURGA COLONY,
PATEL NAGAR, BALLARI.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9063-DB
CRL.A No. 100309 of 2019
5. SURESH
S/O. K. VEERESH
AGE: 20 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O: DURGA COLONY,
PATEL NAGAR, BALLARI.
6. KUM. MAMATHA
D/O. K. VEERESH
AGE: 19 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O: DURGA COLONY,
PATEL NAGAR, BALLARI.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. B. ANWAR BASHA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
(THROUGH GANDHI NAGAR POLICE STATION),
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. M.B. GUNDAWADE, ADDL. SPP.)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S. 374(2) OF CR.P.C.
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND
ORDER OF CONVICTION DATED 11.07.2019 AND SENTENCE
DATED 18.07.2019 PASSED IN S.C.NO.56/2012 PASSED BY
THE II-ADDL. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, BALLARI AND TO
ACQUIT THE APPELLANTS/ACCUSED NOS.3 TO 8 FOR THE
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 143, 147, 148, 448,
302 & 201 R/W SEC. 149 OF IPC INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS
DAY, MOHAMMAD NAWAZ, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9063-DB
CRL.A No. 100309 of 2019
JUDGMENT
This appeal is preferred by accused Nos. 3 to 8, challenging their conviction and sentence passed by the Court of II Addl. District and Sessions Judge at Ballari (hereinafter referred to as 'the Trial Court', for short), in S.C.No.56/2012.
2. Vide impugned judgment, the learned Sessions Judge has convicted accused Nos.1 to 8 for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 448, 302 and 201 read with Section 149 of IPC.
3. Accused Nos.1 and 2 have not challenged the judgment of conviction and sentence passed against them by the Trial Court.
4. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and learned Addl. SPP for the respondent/State and perused the evidence and material on record.
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9063-DB CRL.A No. 100309 of 2019
5. It is the case of prosecution that, on 14.12.2011 at about 4.15 p.m., near the house of deceased Smt.K. Bhavani and K. Naveen Kumar, situated at Patel Nagar, Ballari, on account of previous ill will regarding performance of Pooja at Sanna Durgamma temple and also with regard to dispute of the ancestral property bearing survey No.869/B, accused Nos.1 to 8 formed an unlawful assembly with a common object of committing the murder of Smt.K.Bhavani and her son K. Naveen Kumar and trespassed into their property holding deadly weapons like axe and sticks and committed rioting. They assaulted both the deceased with the weapons they were carrying and committed double murder. Thereafter, to screen themselves from legal punishment and in order to destroy the evidence, burnt the wooden sticks. Further, accused No.2 took away the ornaments which were on the dead bodies.
6. Law was set into motion by PW.1, son of deceased Smt.K.Bhavani and brother of deceased K. -5- NC: 2024:KHC-D:9063-DB CRL.A No. 100309 of 2019 Naveen Kumar. On the basis of his statement-Ex.P1 recorded at the spot, initially a case was registered against 15 accused and investigation was taken up. Spot mahazar and inquest mahazars were conducted. The dead bodies were subjected to postmortem examination. The accused were arrested and incriminating articles were recovered from accused Nos.1 and 2. The blood stained weapons, clothes of the deceased as well as accused Nos.1 and 2 were sent for DNA examination.
7. On completion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed against accused Nos.1 to 8. Names of other accused persons mentioned in the FIR were dropped, while filing the charge sheet.
8. Charges were framed against accused Nos.1 to 8 for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 448, 302 and 201 r/w Section 149 of IPC.
9. In order to establish the charges, prosecution in all examined 28 witnesses and got marked 37 documents -6- NC: 2024:KHC-D:9063-DB CRL.A No. 100309 of 2019 and 34 material objects. The defence got examined one witness as DW1 and got marked Ex.D1 to D5.
10. The learned Sessions Judge vide impugned judgment convicted accused Nos.1 to 8 for the charged offences as noted supra.
11. The arguments of learned counsel for the appellants are as under:
The appellants are falsely implicated by the complainant in view of the admitted property dispute as well as the dispute regarding performance of pooja at Sanna Durgamma temple.
The complainant is not an eye witness to the incident. He named the entire family members to wreak vengeance against them, in view of the previous ill will.
The names of alleged eye witnesses namely PWs.4 and 5 are not mentioned in the FIR. Their, statements are recorded belatedly after two months from the date of incident. Hence, their evidence can not be believed. -7-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9063-DB CRL.A No. 100309 of 2019 Admittedly, PWs.4 and 5 are the labourers of the complainant, who have close affinity with him. They have been working in the land of one Saraswathamma, mother- in-law of PW.1 for the last 12 years, hence, they are interested and partisan witnesses. There is no recovery of weapons at the instance of accused Nos.3 to 8. Hence, allegations that the appellants have assaulted the deceased with wooden sticks are false. Investigating officer has not seized the blood stained cloths of the appellants and as per DNA report, no blood stains are found on the weapons alleged to have been used by the appellants.
12. The learned counsel has further contended that the defence has got examined DW1, Senior Manager of one JSW Steels, wherein, accused No.5 was working at the relevant point of time. By examining the said witness and marking documents Ex.D1 to D5, the defence has established that accused No.5 was on duty having his -8- NC: 2024:KHC-D:9063-DB CRL.A No. 100309 of 2019 general shift from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. and therefore, he was not at all present at the place of incident. He contended that the Trial Court has not taken into consideration the above aspects and by accepting the evidence of PWs.4 and 5 has mechanically passed the impugned judgment convicting the appellants for a serious charge of murder. Therefore, he sought to set aside the impugned judgment and acquit the appellants.
13. Per contra, learned Addl. SPP has contended as under:
All the accused formed an unlawful assembly and came near the house of deceased with a common object holding deadly weapons like axe and sticks. Accused Nos.1 to 4 picked up quarrel with the deceased, accused Nos.5 to 8 supplied weapons and both the deceased were mercilessly assaulted.-9-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9063-DB CRL.A No. 100309 of 2019 Both the deceased have sustained multiple injuries, which shows that they were assaulted not only by accused Nos.1 and 2, but also by the appellants. Death is homicidal in nature and cause of death is on account of shock and hemorrhage as a result of head injuries.
PWs.4 and 5 are the eye witnesses to the incident and they have spoken about the presence and participation of all the accused persons. They have no enmity against the accused to falsely implicate them.
The weapons are seized at the instance of accused Nos.1 and 2. Further, ornaments of the deceased are also recovered at the instance of accused No.2. Doctor has furnished his opinion saying that injuries found on the dead bodies are possible with the weapons which were sent for examination.
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9063-DB CRL.A No. 100309 of 2019 As per DNA report-Ex.P32, the articles which were sent for examination were found to be stained with blood, which further corroborates the evidence of eye witnesses. The learned Addl. SPP has therefore, contended that the Trial Court having appreciated the entire evidence and material on record has rightly convicted accused Nos.1 to 8 for the charged offences. Accordingly, sought for dismissal of the appeal.
14. According to prosecution, on account of the property dispute and enmity with regard to performance of pooja at Sanna Durgamma Temple, all the accused formed an unlawful assembly on 14.12.2011 at about 4.15 pm, with a common object to commit the murder of Smt. K. Bhavani and her son K. Naveen Kumar. They trespassed into their property holding deadly weapons and committed double murder by assaulting them with the weapons they were carrying and then took the valuables belonging to them, which they were wearing and threw the axe and club at the spot and took away the wooden sticks and the
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9063-DB CRL.A No. 100309 of 2019 valuables and then burnt the wooden sticks, so as to destroy the evidence.
15. The first informant-PW1 is the son of deceased Smt.K.Bhavani and brother of deceased K.Naveen Kumar. Accused Nos.1 and 2 are brothers, accused No.3 is the wife of accused No.2, accused No.4 is the wife of accused No.1, accused Nos.5 and 6 are the children of accused No.2 and accused Nos.7 and 8 are the children of accused No.1.
16. In Ex.P1-complaint lodged by PW1, it is stated that his grand father owned a land measuring 7 acres 26 cents. After the death of his grand father and his father, his grand mother and his uncle K.Veeresh i.e. accused No.1, executed a power of attorney in the name of his mother and in the name of another uncle Neelakanta i.e. accused No.2. In the said property, his uncles formed plots and sold them without the knowledge of his mother. About three years prior, they questioned their uncles about the same and in this regard his uncles had quarreled with
- 12 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9063-DB CRL.A No. 100309 of 2019 them. Hence, they filed a case before the Civil Court and the same is pending. In this regard, their uncles were nurturing ill will against them. Further, his uncles namely accused Nos.1 and 2 were looking after the management of Sanna Durgamma temple since twenty years. About three years back, they told them that even they will manage the said temple. Hence, there was a quarrel. A panchayath was held wherein, it was decided that both of them have to perform pooja at the temple for every three years. Hence, since Februrary-2009, his mother, his brother and himself were looking after the management of Sanna Durgamma temple and performing the pooja. The said period would come to an end in the month of February-2012.
17. First informant who is examined as PW1 has reiterated the above averments made in Ex.P1.
18. The prosecution has got examined PWs.13 and 16 with regard to motive aspect. Though, both have been treated hostile by the prosecution, they have deposed that
- 13 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9063-DB CRL.A No. 100309 of 2019 they conducted a panchayath in respect of performing pooja to Sanna Durgamma temple and an agreement was executed, as per which both the parties were to perform pooja every three years. Their evidence shows that as per the agreement, from 2009 for a period of three years, pooja was to be performed by deceased Smt.K.Bhavani. The agreement is marked as Ex.P.17 through PW.16. He has admitted his signature in Ex.P.17. The said agreement was executed between accused Nos.1 and 2 and deceased Smt.K.Bhavani. The said aspect has not been denied by the defence in the cross examination.
19. PW.1 has deposed about the civil case filed before the Court of II Addl. Civil Judge, Ballari in OS No.39/2009. The said suit was filed against accused Nos.1 and 2. Ex.P8 is the record pertaining to the said suit, which was pending as on the date of incident. The suit schedule pertains to the plots carved out of survey No.869/2001 measuring 7.26 acres. Hence, the prosecution has established that there was a property
- 14 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9063-DB CRL.A No. 100309 of 2019 dispute between the complainant's family and accused Nos.1 and 2.
20. The incident took place on 14.12.2011 at about 4.15 p.m. Admittedly, the complainant was not present and he is not an eye witness to the incident. As per Ex.P1, while he was working in Axis bank, Parvathi nagar branch, Ballari, he was informed by his friend Veeresh and one Sathish over phone that his mother and brother have been assaulted by his uncles and others. Immediately, he rushed to the spot and saw several persons gathered in front of his house and also saw his mother and brother lying dead in a pool of blood.
21. PW.24-Police Inspector, working at Gandhi Nagar Police station, Ballari while on duty, received the information over phone at 5 p.m. that some quarrel has taken place near Sanna Durgamma temple. He immediately proceeded to the spot along with his staff and noticed two dead bodies lying at the spot. He recorded the statement of PW.1 as per Ex.P1 and forwarded it to
- 15 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9063-DB CRL.A No. 100309 of 2019 the Police station. PW.26, SHO, registered the case and sent the FIR to the jurisdictional Court.
22. Initially, PW.1 named 15 persons as accused, on the basis of which FIR was registered against accused Nos.1 to 15. However, charge sheet was filed against accused Nos.1 to 8 deleting the names of rest of the accused.
23. In Ex.P1, it is stated that one Veeresh and Sathish informed the complainant over phone about the incident. They are examined as PW.9 and PW.11. We have perused their evidence. We find that both the witnesses are hearsay witnesses as they have not witnessed the actual incident of assault. PW.9 has stated that at about 4.15 p.m. on 14.12.2011 when he was proceeding to his house, he saw people gathered near Sanna Durgamma temple and they were talking that accused Nos.1 and 2 and others were assaulting the deceased persons. Both the witnesses have deposed that they informed the matter to the complainant over phone. A perusal of their evidence
- 16 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9063-DB CRL.A No. 100309 of 2019 clearly show that they are not eye witnesses to the actual incident of assault. However, the claim of the complainant that he was informed over phone by them is substantiated.
24. According to the prosecution, PWs.4 and 5 are the eye witnesses. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the appellants that names of both the eye witnesses are not in the FIR and even after the occurrence of such a gruesome incident, they have neither reported the matter to PW.1 nor to the police immediately. He has therefore contended that PW.4 and PW.5 are got up witnesses since their statements are recorded belatedly, after two months.
25. PW.1 has deposed that he had asked Hanumantha, Anand and Paramesh to clean the bushes and the fence on 13.12.2011. When they had come for cleaning purpose at about 4.15 p.m. on 14.12.2011, they saw the incident and then informed him that his mother and brother were murdered by accused Nos.1 to 8 by
- 17 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9063-DB CRL.A No. 100309 of 2019 assaulting them with weapons like axe and sticks. He has stated that the said persons informed him about the incident on 17.02.2012 and on the next day police recorded their statements. Paramesh is examined as PW.4. Hanumanth is examined as PW.5. Anand (CW.25) has not been examined.
26. Both PWs.4 and 5 have deposed about witnessing the incident when they had gone to clean the bushes and fence, as requested by the complainant on 14.12.2011 at 4.15 p.m. They have stated that they informed the matter to PW.1 on 17.02.2012 when he once again called them for cleaning purpose. They have stated that police recorded their statements on 20.02.2012.
27. In this case, the homicidal death of complainant's mother and brother is not seriously disputed. From the postmortem examination report marked as Exs.P21 and P.22 issued by the doctor-PW.19, we find that cause of death of both the deceased is due to head injury. Deceased Smt.K.Bhavani has sustained four
- 18 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9063-DB CRL.A No. 100309 of 2019 injuries and deceased K.Naveen Kumar has sustained ten injuries. The question is as to whether, PWs.4 and 5 have witnessed the incident and whether the appellants are involved in the commission of the offence and whether they came to the spot with a common object of committing the murder of the two deceased, along with accused Nos.1 and 2.
28. It is well settled that merely because there is delay in recording the statements of eye witnesses that itself is not a ground to discard their evidence in toto. When there are multiple accused, Court has to caution itself and see as to whether all the accused are involved in the commission of the offence. The evidence of such witnesses has to be appreciated by separating grain from the chaff, not as a rule of law, but as a rule of caution.
29. PW.4 has deposed that when he, Anand (PW.5) and Hanumanth were near the house of deceased Smt.K.Bhavani, accused Nos.1 to 4 were seen quarreling with her and K.Naveen kumar. Accused Nos.5 to 8 brought
- 19 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9063-DB CRL.A No. 100309 of 2019 axe and sticks and handed the axe to accused No.2 and club to accused No.1. Accused No.2 assaulted deceased Bhavani with the axe on her head, accused No.1 assaulted deceased Naveen kumar on his face, accused Nos.3 and 4 assaulted both the deceased with sticks and accused Nos.5 to 8 surrounded them holding sticks.
30. PW.5 has also deposed that, accused Nos.1 to 4 were quarreling with the deceased, accused Nos.5 to 8 brought the axe and sticks and handed over to accused Nos.1 and 2. Accused No.1 assaulted deceased Naveen Kumar with the club and accused No.2 assaulted deceased Bhavani with the axe on her head. He has stated that accused Nos.3, 4 and 7 have assaulted the deceased.
31. Omnibus allegations are made against accused Nos.3 to 8, without mentioning specific overt acts. Further, the assault made by accused No.7 has not been spoken by PW.4. Allegation against accused Nos.5 to 8, as per PW.4 is that, they surrounded the deceased. The specific overt acts of assaulting the deceased with axe and club are
- 20 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9063-DB CRL.A No. 100309 of 2019 against accused Nos.1 and 2. Allegation against A5 to A8, as per PW4 is that, they surrounded the deceased.
32. It is the specific case of prosecution that after assaulting the two deceased, accused Nos.1 and 2 threw the weapons at the spot and other accused carried the weapons with them. At the time of conducting spot mahazar-Ex.P-2, an axe and a club marked as M.O.3 and M.O.-4, used by accused Nos.1 and 2 were seized. The panch witness to spot mahazar-Ex.P-2 has deposed about the seizure of the said weapons from the spot. Both the said weapons were bloodstained. After the arrest of accused Nos.1 and 2, their voluntary statements were recorded. Under a panchana-Ex.P-9, 9 sticks marked as M.Os.-5 to 14 were recovered and at the instance of accused No.2, M.Os.15 to 20 namely, the valuables taken away from the body of the deceased, were recovered. The clothes worn by accused Nos.1 and 2 were found to be bloodstained. The same were seized under Ex.P-20. The cloths are marked as M.Os.31 to 34. PW-18 has spoken
- 21 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9063-DB CRL.A No. 100309 of 2019 about the seizure of bloodstained T-shirts and pants from accused Nos.1 and 2.
33. The bloodstained weapons seized from the spot, the sticks seized at the instance of accused No.1 as well as the bloodstained cloths of the deceased and accused Nos. 1 and 2 (M.Os.31 to 34) were sent for DNA examination. The prosecution has got examined PW-27, the Scientific Officer, FSL, Bengaluru. His report is marked as Ex.P-32. His report shows that the articles namely M.O.3-axe and M.O.4-club and the cloths of the deceased and accused Nos.1 and 2 were bloodstained. As per the report, the deceased individual Smt. Bhavani from whom the blood sample was collected on bandage cloth is being the contributor of the bloodstains detected at dried blood sample i.e., T-shirts and pants sent as well as her cloths. Similarly, the deceased individual K. Naveen Kumar from whom the blood sample was collected on bandage cloth is being the contributor of the biological stains detected on the cloths of the deceased and bloodstains detected on the
- 22 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9063-DB CRL.A No. 100309 of 2019 dried blood sample found in Kodli (M.O.3) and wooden stick (M.O.4) as well as Kadaga and ring, pant and shirt.
34. Ex.P-32-DNA report does not indicate detection of bloodstains on M.Os.5 to 14, the sticks which are alleged to have been used by the appellants. Admittedly, the wooden sticks marked as M.Os.5 to 14 were not seized at the instance of the appellants namely accused Nos.3 to
8. According to PW-4 and PW-5, M.O.3-axe was used by accused No.2 and M.O.4-club was used by accused No.1. After assaulting the deceased, the said weapons were thrown at the spot and they were found bloodstained. The DNA examination confirms that the bloodstains found on the said weapons, the bloodstains found on the cloths of accused Nos.1 and 2 and the bloodstains found on the cloths of the deceased were matching. However, the wooden sticks alleged to have been used by other accused are not bloodstained and more importantly, the said sticks are not recovered at the instance of accused Nos.3 to 8, on the other hand, the same were recovered at the
- 23 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9063-DB CRL.A No. 100309 of 2019 instance of accused No.1. If we trust the evidence of PW-4 and PW-5, who have stated that the wooden sticks were carried by other accused persons after the incident and if really the said sticks were used to assault the deceased who sustained multiple bleeding injuries, then the sticks would have been stained with blood. Hence, the participation of accused Nos.3 to 8 as alleged by the prosecution appears to be doubtful.
35. The defence has got examined one witness as DW-1, Senior Manager of one JSW company. He has stated that accused No.5-Rohit was working in their department as a Trainee and he joined the duty on 07.11.2011. The confirmation letter and salary slip of accused No.5 has been got marked through the said witness as Exs.D-2 and D-3. Further, the attendance register extract is marked as Ex.D-4. The said witness has stated that accused No.5 was on duty on 14.12.2011 between 9.00 a.m. to 6.00 pm. as he was working in a general shift. He has stated that nobody can go out of
- 24 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9063-DB CRL.A No. 100309 of 2019 JSW premises without permission from him and accused No.5 was in the premises between 9.00 a.m. to 6.00 p.m. on 14.12.2011. Ex.D-4(a) is the signature of accused No.5 in the register. In the cross-examination conducted by the Public Prosecutor, it is elicited that the distance between Ballari and Toranagallu, where the company situated, is about 34 km and at least 40 minutes is required to cover the said distance. There is nothing elicited in the cross-examination of DW-1 to show that accused No.5 was not working as Trainee in the company where he was a Senior Manager and that on 14.12.2011, accused No.5 left the premises of the company before 6.00 p.m.
36. According to the prosecution, incident took place at 4.15 p.m. on 14.12.2011. By examining DW-1 and marking relevant documents, defence has established that accused No.5 was present in the company premises, where he was working as Trainee, between 9.00 a.m. to 6.00 p.m. Hence, the evidence of eyewitnesses namely
- 25 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9063-DB CRL.A No. 100309 of 2019 PW-4 and PW-5, who have deposed about the presence of accused No.5 at the scene of occurrence is highly doubtful and that also raises a doubt in the mind of the Court regarding their credence, insofar as the involvement of accused Nos.3 to 8 in the crime.
37. In Ex.P-1, the complainant has stated that he was informed by PW-9 and PW-11 that his uncles and others are assaulting his mother and brother. PW-9 and PW-11 in their evidence have stated that the people who had gathered were talking that accused No.1 and others have assaulted the deceased persons. The said witnesses have not specifically named the presence or participation of accused Nos.3 to 8. In the said facts and circumstances, the evidence of PW-4 and PW-5 regarding the involvement of accused Nos.3 to 8 cannot be believed particularly in view of the delay in recording their statements. At the cost of repetition, it is relevant to mention that in the FIR, PW-1 has named as many as 15 persons as accused, whereas, in the charge sheet, accused
- 26 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9063-DB CRL.A No. 100309 of 2019 Nos.9 to 15 named in the FIR have been dropped. The possibility of implicating accused Nos.3 to 8, who are the family members of accused Nos.1 and 2, in view of the admitted ill-will between the parties, cannot be ruled out. Hence, the findings recorded by the trial Court to convict the appellants namely accused Nos.3 to 8 on the basis of the evidence of PW-4 and PW-5 is not sustainable. Further, there is no evidence adduced by the prosecution to show that accused Nos.3 to 8 have burnt the wooden sticks, to destroy evidence. The burnt sticks are also not recovered from them. Hence, the trial Court was not proper in convicting them. The reasons assigned for convicting them are not in accordance with law. The said accused are entitled to benefit of doubt.
38. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, the following:
ORDER
(i) Appeal is allowed.
- 27 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9063-DB CRL.A No. 100309 of 2019
(ii) The judgment and order dated 11.07.2019 and 18.07.2019 passed by the II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Ballari, in S.C.No.56/2012 insofar as convicting and sentencing the appellants/ accused Nos.3 to 8 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 448, 302 and 201 read with Section 149 of IPC is hereby set aside.
(iii) Appellant/accused Nos.3 to 8 are acquitted of the charged offences.
(iv) Accused Nos.3 and 4 shall be released from custody forthwith, if not required in any other case.
(v) Bail bonds executed by accused Nos.5 to 8 stand cancelled.
The operative portion of the order shall be communicated to the concerned jail authority.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE gab - upto to para 4 and 14 HMB - para 5 to 13 and 15 to 31 Naa - para 32 to end LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 25