Karnataka High Court
S.G. Nagendrappa vs State Of Karnataka on 15 April, 2024
Author: Mohammad Nawaz
Bench: Mohammad Nawaz
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:14995
CRL.A No. 931 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 931 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
1. S.G. NAGENDRAPPA S/O SHIVALINGAPPA
AGED 72 YEARS, OCC: AGRI
2. NARENDRA S/O NARENDRAPPA
AGED 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRI
3. NAVEEN S/O NARENDRAPPA
AGED 43 YEARS, OCC :AGRI
4. SHAKUNTALAMMA, W/O NARENDRAPPA
AGED 63 YEARS, OCC: AGRI
ALL ARE R/O SOMASHETTYHALLI VILLAGE
CHANNAGIRI TQ-577 213.
...APPELLANTS
Digitally (BY SMT. ARCHANA MURTHY, ADVOCATE)
signed by
LAKSHMI T AND:
Location:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
High Court
THROUGH STATE BY
of
CHANNAGIRI POLICE
Karnataka
DAVANAGERE- 577001.
REPRESENTED BY SPP
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU-560001.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.RAHUL RAI K., HCGP)
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S.374(2) CR.P.C PRAYING TO ALLOW
THIS APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER
PASSED BY THE I ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT
DAVANGERE IN SESSIONS CASE NO.81/2024 DATED 02.03.2022.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:14995
CRL.A No. 931 of 2022
THIS APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Feeling aggrieved by the Judgment and Order dated
02.03.2022/08.03.2022 passed by the Court of I Additional
District and Sessions Judge, Davangere in SC No.81/2014, the
appellants have preferred this appeal.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants, the
learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State
and perused the material on record.
3. The learned Sessions Judge, vide impugned
judgment, convicted accused Nos.1 to 8 for offences punishable
under Section 143, 147, 148, 323 and 324 r/w Section 149 IPC
and acquitted them of the offences punishable under Section
307, 504, 506 and 75 r/w Section 149 of IPC.
4. The trial Court has sentenced the accused to pay
separate fine amounts for the offences for which they were
convicted, with default sentence for non-payment of fine. This
appeal is preferred by accused Nos.3 to 5 and 8 respectively.
NC: 2024:KHC:14995
5. It is the case of prosecution that on 18.02.2014 at
about 7.00 p.m. when the complainant-G.Mahesh (PW4), owner
of Sri Venkateshwara Medical Shop, located at Tarlabalu
Compex, Nallur village, was sweeping in front of his shop and
his brother Shivu @ Shivappa was sitting inside the shop, all
the accused, on account of previous enmity in connection with
a land dispute came to the spot by forming an unlawful
assembly holding chopper, iron rod, stone and clubs, picked up
quarrel with them, abused them in filthy language and saying
that they will not spare their lives, assaulted them with the
weapons they were holding, with an intention to commit their
murder.
6. Insofar as the allegations of attempt made on the
lives of the injured-PWs.4 and 8 are concerned, the learned
Sessions Judge has absolved the accused of the charge levelled
under Section 307 IPC. However, considering the evidence of
the prosecution witnesses namely PWs.4 and 8, the injured in
this case and also the evidence of PWs.7, 9 and 10 and medical
evidence, the trial Court has come to the conclusion that the
prosecution has established that the accused persons have
come together to the spot by holding MOs.1 to 5 with a
NC: 2024:KHC:14995
common object of causing injuries to the complainant and his
brother, due to previous enmity.
7. The complainant-PW4 and PW8 are the injured in
this case. According to prosecution, in view of the land dispute
and on account of previous enmity, the accused came to the
shop where both of them were present, holding chopper, iron
rod, stone and clubs etc., picked up quarrel and assaulted
them with the weapons they were carrying.
8. Statement of the complainant was received by the
police from Channagiri Government Hospital, wherein he was
taking treatment. Both the injured were treated by
PW3-Medical Officer, Channagiri Government Hospital.
Ex.P3 is the wound certificate pertaining to the complainant-
PW4 and Ex.P4 pertains to PW3.
9. As per Ex.P3, PW4 has sustained i) tenderness over
the (L) side of the chest measuring 2 x 2 cms. and ii)
tenderness over the (L) knee joint measuring 2 x 2 cms.
10. As per Ex.P4, PW8 has sustained i) incised wound
over the scalp measuring about 3 x 5 cms. and ii) contusion
NC: 2024:KHC:14995
over the back (L) infra scapular region measuring about
3 x 3 cms.
11. The injuries sustained by PWs.4 and 8 are said to
be simple in nature.
12. The defence has got marked Ex.D1-copy of the
wound certificate of accused No.3, Exs.D2 and D3-portion of
statements of PWs.8 and 10 and Ex.D4-Certified copy of FIR in
Cr.No.52/2014.
13. Undisputedly, there is a counter complaint lodged
by accused No.1 in this case. On the basis of which, a case
was registered in Cr.No.52/2014 against PWs.4 and 8 herein
and two others by name Prabhu and Mahadevappa, in respect
of the incident which took place on 18.02.2014 near Sri
Venkateshwara Medical Shop. It is submitted by the learned
counsel for appellants that in the said case the trial was held
against PWs.4, 8 and two others in SC No.111/2014 and the
case ended in acquittal, giving benefit of doubt to the accused
persons, vide judgment dated 02.03.2022 passed by the I
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Davangere. Certified
copy of the judgment is furnished.
NC: 2024:KHC:14995
14. A perusal of the records pertaining to the counter
case would reveal that accused Nos.1 and 3 in the present case
are the injured in the said case. They were examined as PWs.1
and 3 respectively. Accused No.1 is said to be no more. Both
accused Nos.1 and 3 have sustained fractures. Ex.P8 is the
wound certificate of accused No.1 and Ex.P9 is the wound
certificate of accused No.3 in the said case. While giving
benefit of doubt, the learned Sessions Judge has observed that
the Investigating Officer has not collected X-rays from the
concerned doctor and even the doctor who gave evidence has
not produced X-rays or radiology opinion and the doctor was
not examined who treated the injured to prove that the said
injuries are grievous in nature.
15. Admittedly, there is a counter case in respect of
which a complaint is lodged against PWs.4 and 8 in the present
case and two others, wherein, accused Nos.1 and 3 have
sustained injuries. The wound certificates are marked as
Exs.P8 and 9 respectively in SC No.111/2014. PW11, the
doctor has described the injuries sustained by accused No.1 as
contusion and tenderness over left wrist and contusion and
NC: 2024:KHC:14995
tenderness over left hand and the said injury is said to be
grievous in nature. PW3 has sustained a chopped wound of
the right index finger.
16. In the case on hand, the injured namely PWs.4 and
8 and PWs.7, 9 and 10 have supported the case of prosecution.
However, none of them in their depositions have explained the
injuries sustained by accused Nos.1 and 2. It is not
forthcoming as to how accused Nos.1 and 3 have sustained
injuries. In SC No.111/2014, it is the case of prosecution that
on 18.02.2014 at about 6.45 p.m., in front of the Medical shop
of accused No.1, when S.G.Eshwarappa (CW1) was walking, all
the accused persons on account of previous enmity relating to
land dispute, wrongfully restrained him, abused him in filthy
language and with an intention to kill, assaulted him with
chopper, iron rod etc. When CWs.4 and 6 came to pacify the
quarrel, they assaulted them as well, on account of which
S.G.Eshwarappa (CW1) and Nagendrappa (CW4) sustained
injuries.
17. Admittedly, there is a civil dispute between the
parties. In the incident which took place in the morning of
NC: 2024:KHC:14995
18.02.2014 near the medical shop of accused No.1, both the
parties have sustained injuries and complaints are lodged
against each other. PWs.4 and 8, namely the injured in this
case have not explained the injuries sustained by accused
Nos.1 and 3. In fact, in the cross-examination, they have
denied the injuries sustained by accused Nos.1 and 3. As per
the spot mahazar, the incident has taken place in front of
Sri Venkateshwara Medical Shop. It is relevant to see that
according to PW4, he was assaulted by accused No.1 on the
head but no such wound is seen in the wound certificate-Ex.P3.
If the accused have assaulted PWs.4 and 8 with weapons like
chopper, iron rod, club, stone etc., then serious injuries would
have been sustained by PWs.4 and 8. Under these
circumstances, the appellants are entitled for benefit of doubt.
Hence, the following:
ORDER
i. Appeal is allowed.
ii. The Judgment and Order dated 02.03.2022 and
08.03.2022 passed by the I Additional District and
Sessions Judge, Davangere, convicting and
sentencing the appellants for the offences
NC: 2024:KHC:14995
punishable under Section 143, 147, 148, 323, 324
r/w Section 149 IPC is hereby set aside.
iii. They are acquitted of the offences, for which the
trial Court has convicted them.
iv. If fine amount has been deposited by the
appellants, the same shall be refunded to them.
SD/-
JUDGE
TL
