- (1.)1. The appellants, who had the benefit of an acquittal in the hands of the learned XXth Additional Sessions Judge, Bangalore City when tried for charges for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 341 read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code, suffered a conviction in the hands of the High Court which on an appeal filed by the State set aside the acquittal and convicted them of the offences punishable under Sections 302 read with Sec. 34 Indian Penal Code while affirming the acquittal under Sec. 341 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. The accused are before us in this appeal.
(2.)We have heard Mr. Naresh Kaushik learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. Sanjay R. Hegde, Advocate appearing for the respondent - State.
(3.)The case of the prosecution was that on 30th July, 1992 at about 6.30 p.m. at a place called Chikkabettahalli in the limits of Yelahanka Police Station, the appellants committed the gruesome murder of one Sheikh Ghouse by inflicting injuries on his legs and on the back of his head with matchu, resulting in the instant death of the said Sheikh Ghouse on the spot. The motive attributed is that the accused, an already married person, had enticed away the sister of the deceased about six months prior to the occurrence and thereafter he returned back to the village and resumed his normal work and, therefore, the accused got infuriated and had a grudge against the victim. The prosecution sought to substantiate its case by examining PWs 1 to 15, of which the elder brothers of the deceased were PW1 and PW2. The others examined were, PW3 related to both the victim and the accused, PW4 another cousin of the deceased, PW5, the wife and PW6, the father-in-law of the deceased and PW7, a nearby resident. PW3 was also a witness for the recovery of the weapon said to have been used for committing the offence and was a signatory to the recovery memo. He turned hostile by stating that he does not know anything and had not seen the assault.