BHIMAPPA CHANDAPPA HOSAMANI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA
LAWS(SC)-2006-9-50
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: KARNATAKA)
Decided on September 20,2006

BHIMAPPA CHANDAPPA HOSAMANI Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF KARNATAKA Respondents


Cited Judgements :-

DHIRENDRA KUMAR @ DHIROO VS. STATE [LAWS(UTN)-2007-11-37] [REFERRED TO]
MANNU SAO VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(SC)-2010-7-78] [REFERRED TO]
NAMDEO VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(SC)-2007-3-28] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF BIHAR VS. GIRJA SINGH [LAWS(PAT)-2013-10-11] [REFERRED TO]
RAJU VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2009-5-813] [REFERRED TO]
PREM PAL VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2016-8-10] [REFERRED]
KUNWAR PAL SAINI VS. STATE [LAWS(ALL)-2017-12-152] [REFERRED TO]
HARIHAR SINGH VS. STATE [LAWS(ALL)-2015-5-176] [REFERRED TO]
BAHADUR SINGH @ RAJ BAHADUR SINGH VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2008-8-74] [REFERRED TO]
MANOHAR MUNNA LAL VS. STATE OF UTTARKHAND [LAWS(UTN)-2009-6-1] [REFERRED TO]
VITHAL PUNDALIK ZENDGE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(SC)-2008-11-51] [REFERRED TO]
RAJESH, S/O NARAYANAN VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2017-5-159] [REFERRED TO]
VISHAL YADAV VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(DLH)-2014-4-24] [REFERRED TO]
MOTI PRASAD VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2016-10-104] [REFERRED TO]
SUBODH KUMAR SHARMA VS. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND [LAWS(UTN)-2021-11-76] [REFERRED TO]
JOKHU PASWAN VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND [LAWS(JHAR)-2019-11-180] [REFERRED TO]
NAKUL YADAV, S/O-JAGDEO YADAV VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND [LAWS(JHAR)-2019-11-183] [REFERRED TO]
MAHESH @ DAMO PRAHLADMAL SINDHI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2013-7-641] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. BHASKAR TUKARAM KAMBLE [LAWS(BOM)-2021-3-207] [REFERRED TO]
UDIT NARAYAN SINGH VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2017-9-155] [REFERRED TO]
RAM VS. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND [LAWS(ALL)-2008-3-78] [REFERRED TO]
ASHOK NARANG VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2012-1-325] [REFERRED TO]
MOHD BAKSH VS. STATE [LAWS(J&K)-2014-3-10] [REFERRED TO]
GIAN SINGH VS. STATE OF J. & K. [LAWS(J&K)-2014-6-20] [REFERRED TO]
Manohar lal VS. State of Uttarakhand [LAWS(UTN)-2009-6-15] [REFERRED TO]
CHANDRA MOHAN SARKAR VS. STATE OF TRIPURA [LAWS(TRIP)-2022-4-22] [REFERRED TO]
DEEPAK KUMAR VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2015-9-43] [REFERRED TO]
ARUN DEKA VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2023-3-17] [REFERRED TO]
MAHENDRA UTTAMRAO CHAVAN VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2006-11-43] [REFERRED TO]
GULAB VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2022-2-20] [REFERRED TO]
PRAKASH VS. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2006-11-139] [REFERRED TO]
RAMAN VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2015-8-71] [REFERRED TO]
UNNIKRISHNAN S/O VASU AND ORS VS. STATE OF KERALA AND ORS [LAWS(KER)-2014-2-290] [REFERRED TO]
MOHD AFSAR VS. STATE NCT OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2012-4-313] [REFERRED TO]
KALLU KHAN VS. STATE OF M.P. [LAWS(MPH)-2018-3-565] [REFERRED TO]
SURJIT SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2014-5-918] [REFERRED]
ELANGBAM GOPAL SINGH VS. STATE OF MANIPUR [LAWS(MANIP)-2022-12-8] [REFERRED TO]
HARIBANSH SINGH VS. A.G.A. [LAWS(ALL)-2015-9-72] [REFERRED TO]
CHANDAN SINGH VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2021-12-93] [REFERRED TO]
RAGHUNATH RAMNATH ZOLEKAR VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2013-2-7] [REFERRED TO]
AMAR SINGH VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2009-8-38] [REFERRED TO]
SHEETAL ANIL BERLEKAR VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2022-2-45] [REFERRED TO]
GANESH SURESH JADHAV VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2022-4-20] [REFERRED TO]
MOHD ALI VS. STATE OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2006-12-145] [REFERRED TO]
MD. YASHIN ALI VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2019-11-116] [REFERRED TO]
YASHIN ALI (MD.) VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2019-11-292] [REFERRED TO]
SHANKARBHAI @ NADAN KARNAPPAN DARBAR & ORS. VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2017-3-94] [REFERRED TO]
CHHOTA SALMAN S/O LATE MD JAMSHED ALI VS. RAMAN S/O SHYAM VEER [LAWS(DLH)-2018-10-292] [REFERRED TO]
BALIRAM & OTHERS VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2015-7-58] [REFERRED TO]
ALLAUDDIN VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2014-4-178] [REFERRED TO]
MANRAKHAN S/O SHRI GANPATI PRASAD SHARMA VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2017-9-55] [REFERRED TO]
HANNA @ HARNARAYAN AND ANOTHER VS. STATE OF M P [LAWS(MPH)-2012-7-287] [REFERRED]
SABU VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2016-8-161] [REFERRED TO]
RAMESHBHAI ICHCHHUBHAI RATHOD VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2007-9-80] [REFERRED]
SOME BESRA VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND [LAWS(JHAR)-2019-10-87] [REFERRED TO]
NAYAN SINGH MUNDA, VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND [LAWS(JHAR)-2020-2-106] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF J & K TH. P/S CITY JAMMU VS. ELPRESS MATTOO [LAWS(J&K)-2013-9-65] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF J&K. VS. KHURSHEED AHMED [LAWS(J&K)-2015-3-23] [REFERRED TO]
MAHESH VS. STATE OF G N C T OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2007-4-161] [REFERRED TO]
PRAKASH BHAWANI PRASHAD VS. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2006-11-158] [REFERRED TO]
MANNU SAO VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2008-9-161] [REFERRED TO]
BHANWAR SINGH VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2018-2-54] [REFERRED TO]
RABI KUMAR @ RAVI KUMAR VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND [LAWS(JHAR)-2009-5-191] [REFERRED TO]
DHIRENDRA KUMAR ALIAS DHIROO VS. STATE [LAWS(ALL)-2007-11-50] [REFERRED TO]
SURENDRAN M. @ KALYANI SURENDRAN VS. STATE [LAWS(KER)-2021-3-16] [REFERRED TO]
SACHIN ALIAS CHAJJA VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2019-10-123] [REFERRED TO]
HANNA @ HARNARAYAN VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2012-7-33] [REFERRED TO]
JUMBAL NAYAK, VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND [LAWS(JHAR)-2019-12-98] [REFERRED TO]
ANIL MANJHI VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND [LAWS(JHAR)-2019-8-140] [REFERRED TO]
ROHIT NAYAK, VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND [LAWS(JHAR)-2020-1-129] [REFERRED TO]
RAMESHWAR VS. STATE OF U. P. [LAWS(ALL)-2022-7-215] [REFERRED TO]
LAKHWINDER SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2014-5-810] [REFERRED TO]
BIJO PANDA VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2007-11-21] [REFERRED TO]
BOYA SREENIVASULU VS. STATE OF A.P. [LAWS(TLNG)-2018-11-35] [REFERRED TO]
RAVI VS. STATE [LAWS(SC)-2008-9-19] [REFERRED TO]
CHHOTAN KUMHAR VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND [LAWS(JHAR)-2020-2-102] [REFERRED TO]
RATANU VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND [LAWS(JHAR)-2019-10-85] [REFERRED TO]
SUMAN DAMODAR DHOBI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2013-7-561] [REFERRED TO]
AMAL ARI VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2010-5-84] [REFERRED TO]
MOHD RAFIQ VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2008-9-114] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)The appellants have appealed to this Court by special leave against their conviction and sentence passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore on 26th May, 2004 in Criminal Appeal No. 1485 of 1998. The appellants were charged of the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code for having committed the murder of Lakshman at about 6.00 a.m. on May 30, 1996 while he was sleeping on the 'katta' of his house. The Principal Sessions Judge, Bijapur, who tried the appellants in Sessions Case No.144 of 1998 acquitted them of the charge by his judgment and order of September 14, 1998. The trial Court held that out of the four witnesses examined as eye witnesses, two, namely- PW.8 and PW.9 turned hostile and did not support the case of the prosecution. The remaining two witnesses were PW-1, Smt. Nimbavva, mother of the deceased and PW-2, Ayyappa, the younger brother of the deceased, aged about 12 years. On an appreciation of their evidence the trial court held that PW-2 had not really witnessed the occurrence while PW-1 was not a truthful witness. The High Court on re- appreciation of the evidence on record came to the contrary conclusion that PWs. 1 and 2 were truthful eye-witnesses and on the basis of their evidence the appellants could be safely convicted of the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC. Accordingly the appellants were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life.
(2.)The case of the prosecution is that on May 30, 1996 the deceased was sleeping on the 'katta'in the outer portion of the house by the side of the road, while the remaining members of the family were sleeping inside. According to PW-1 on May 30, 1996 her husband Basappa, PW-3 woke up at about 5.00 a.m. since he had to go to Muddebihal. PW-1 and PW-2 also woke up with him. PW-3 wanted the deceased to accompany him to Muddebihal but he insisted on sleeping and stated that he will come to Muddebihal with food by 9 O' clock bus. While PW-3 left for Muddebihal, she started washing utensils at a place which was at a distance of about 2 meters from the 'katta' where the deceased was sleeping. There is evidence on record to the effect that at about 5.00 a.m. it was dark but at about 6.00 a.m. there was some light as the sun was about to rise. At about that time she noticed the three accused variously armed coming there. While appellant No.2 was armed with an axe the other two were armed with 'Jambiya'. They came saying that they will finish the deceased. In spite of her begging of them not to do so, they started assaulting the deceased. She saw that appellant No.2 gave 2 or 3 blows on the neck of the deceased while the remaining two assaulted him with their weapons on different parts of the body. According to her, the occurrence was witnessed by her younger son, PW-2 and PWs. 8 and 9, the neighbours, who had come on hearing her cries.
(3.)According to her a police havaldar came to her house after about 4-5 hours and recorded the information given by her. At about 12 noon an Inspector came who held inquest over the dead body of the deceased and took other steps in the course of investigation. The dead body of the deceased was then sent for post-mortem examination.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.