State of Karnataka Vs. Narayan Babu Sanadi & Ors.
EmailAppeal: Criminal Appeal No. 334 Of 1984
(From the Judgment and Order dated 20.01.83 of the Karnataka High Court in Crl. A.No. 237 of 1981)
(From the Judgment and Order dated 20.01.83 of the Karnataka High Court in Crl. A.No. 237 of 1981)
Petitioner: State of Karnataka
Respondent: Narayan Babu Sanadi & Ors.
Apeal: Criminal Appeal No. 334 Of 1984
(From the Judgment and Order dated 20.01.83 of the Karnataka High Court in Crl. A.No. 237 of 1981)
(From the Judgment and Order dated 20.01.83 of the Karnataka High Court in Crl. A.No. 237 of 1981)
Judges: G.T. NANAVATI & S.P. KURDUKAR, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Jul 23, 1998
Appearances:
Mr. M. Veerappa, K.H. Nobin Singh, Advocates for the appellant
Mr. S.S. Khanduja and Manoj Mishra, Advocates for the Respond-ents.
Head Note:
CRIMINAL LAW
Penal Code, 1860
Sec- 326, 450 read with Sec 34 Dangers assault – No direct evi-dence – Assault on one deceased in the field – Assault on another deceased in his house – Both places three furlongs away – Only statement by second deceased made basis of conviction – Held that High Court was right in not relying upon statement of second deceased and accordingly acquitting the accused (Parr 3,4)
JUDGEMENT:
NANAVATI, J.
1. The State of Karnataka has filed this appeal against the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 237/81. The four respondents were convicted by the trial court under Sections 326 and 450 both read with Section 34 IPC.
2. The prosecution case was that because of the family property dispute, relations between deceased Nagappa and deceased Babu with the accused, who were all closely related to each other, were strained and that led to an assault by respondent Nos. 1-4 on Nagappa when he was working in the fields and which resulted in his immediate death and also on deceased Babu, who was taking rest in his house and which also led to his death after about 10 days. The prosecution could not lead any direct evidence regard-ing the manner in which Nagappa and Babu were killed. But the trial court relying upon the statement of deceased Babu – Ex.P. 42 convicted the respondents as stated above.
3. The High Court on reappreciation of the evidence came to the conclusion that the statement of deceased Babu – Ex.P. 42 was not all reliable. The High Court pointed out that the statement of Ex.P. 42 was stated to have been given in presence of PWs 3 and 12. But PWs. 3 and 12 positively stated before the court that no such statement was given by Babu. The assault on Nagappa had taken place in the field which was three furlongs away from Babu’s house and the assault on Babu took place while he was resting in his house; and yet, in Ex.P.42 there was a reference to the assault on Nagappa in the field. The High Court taking these factors into consideration came to the conclusion that deceased Babu had not given the statement Ex.P.42 deposed by the Investigating Officer.
4. There was no other evidence led by the prosecution against the respondents. The High Court was, therefore, right in acquit-ting the respondents. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. Bail bonds of the respondents are ordered to be cancelled.
1. The State of Karnataka has filed this appeal against the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 237/81. The four respondents were convicted by the trial court under Sections 326 and 450 both read with Section 34 IPC.
2. The prosecution case was that because of the family property dispute, relations between deceased Nagappa and deceased Babu with the accused, who were all closely related to each other, were strained and that led to an assault by respondent Nos. 1-4 on Nagappa when he was working in the fields and which resulted in his immediate death and also on deceased Babu, who was taking rest in his house and which also led to his death after about 10 days. The prosecution could not lead any direct evidence regard-ing the manner in which Nagappa and Babu were killed. But the trial court relying upon the statement of deceased Babu – Ex.P. 42 convicted the respondents as stated above.
3. The High Court on reappreciation of the evidence came to the conclusion that the statement of deceased Babu – Ex.P. 42 was not all reliable. The High Court pointed out that the statement of Ex.P. 42 was stated to have been given in presence of PWs 3 and 12. But PWs. 3 and 12 positively stated before the court that no such statement was given by Babu. The assault on Nagappa had taken place in the field which was three furlongs away from Babu’s house and the assault on Babu took place while he was resting in his house; and yet, in Ex.P.42 there was a reference to the assault on Nagappa in the field. The High Court taking these factors into consideration came to the conclusion that deceased Babu had not given the statement Ex.P.42 deposed by the Investigating Officer.
4. There was no other evidence led by the prosecution against the respondents. The High Court was, therefore, right in acquit-ting the respondents. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. Bail bonds of the respondents are ordered to be cancelled.
