JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) The facts leading to the filing of this appeal by way of
special leave are as under:
(2.) PW-1 Bhagyavathi, wife of Thimmappa deceased of village
Arebilachi, is the complainant in the case. Thimmappa was
the son of Navilapa. Navilapa had, in addition, five other sons
Devendrappa, Manjappa, Chandrappa, Nagarajappa and
Gadigeshappa and two daughters including Ratnamma PW-2.
Navilapa had about 12 acres of ancestral land and he had
divided the said land equally between himself and his sons
and all were in possession of their respective shares thereafter.
Thimmappa, Devendrappa and Manjappa were residing
separately whereas the other two, Chandrappa and
Gadigeshappa, were residing in their old family home whereas
Nagarajappa was residing with his father Navilapa and his
sister Ratnamma. Thimmappa, however, acquired about 10
acres of land on his own but his brothers Chandrappa and
Gadigeshappa were demanding a share out of this land as well
and on account of this development, the relationship between
the brothers had become strained. Chandrappa and
Gadigeshappa also filed a suit seeking a share in the 10 acres
acquired by Thimmappa with the result that the relation
between the brothers was further strained. At about 4 p.m. on
1.8.1993, Thimmappa told his wife Bhagyavathi that he had
learnt that Chandrappa and Gadigeshappa had gone to the
field to pluck coconuts and that he was going to prevent them
from doing so. Thimmappa and his brother Devendrappa PW3
then left for the fields on a scooter. A few minutes later
Rathnamma PW2, sister-in-law of Bhagyavathi PW-1 came to
her house and informed her that she had seen Chandrappa
and Gadigeshappa accompanied by their brother-in-law
Hanumanthappa, Shiva and Siddeshappa along with
Bhoomesha and Manja proceeding towards the field armed
with Choppers and sickles and she apprehended some danger.
Bhagyavathi and Rathnamma then left for the field and as
they reached the outer fencing at about 4.30 p.m., they saw all
the accused as well as Bhoomesha and Manja assaulting
Thimmappa with sickles and choppers. PW3 Devendrappa
went to the rescue of his brother but he too was assaulted and
having sustained an injury he ran away towards the village.
PWs1 and 2 thereafter entered the garden and saw that
Thimmappa was lying grievously injured near the Samadhi
adjoining the land. The accused Siddeshappa and
Hanumanthappa also abused and assaulted the two women.
PW4 Prashanth Kumar, who was attracted to the place,
rushed in with some water which he attempted to put into
Thimmappa's mouth but he succumbed to his injuries at the
spot. PW3 Devendrappa was also taken to the Bhadravathi
hospital by PW11 Rudrappa whereas PWs.1,2 and 4 stood
near the dead body. It was also noticed that the accused while
running away had left behind a sickle and a club near the
dead body. An FIR was got registered by PW1 Bhagyavathi at
about 11.45 p.m. at the Police Station. The investigation was
taken over by Inspector M.I. Jameel PW20 who visited the
scene of occurrence on 2nd August 1993 at about 6.30 a.m.
and prepared the inquest report and recorded the statements
of the witnesses and picked up the sickle and club in the
presence of witnesses. His efforts to trace out the accused
were, however, not successful till the 3rd August 1993 when he
arrested four of them. Accused No.2 was arrested on
10.9.1993. He also visited the Government Hospital
Bhadravathi on the same day and seized the blood stained
clothes of injured PW3 Devendrappa. Several weapons of
offence were also recovered on the interrogation of the
accused. On the completion of the investigation, the accused
were charged for offences punishable under sections 143,
147,148,302 and 324 read with 149 of the IPC.
(3.) The prosecution in support of its case relied primarily on
the statements of the four eye witnesses PW1 Bhagyavathi,
wife of the deceased, her sister-in-law PW2 Rathnamma, PW3
Devendrappa an injured witness and brother of the deceased
and of two of the accused, and PW4 Prashanth Kumar son of
PW3, a boy aged 13 years. Reliance was also placed on certain
pieces of circumstantial evidence. The prosecution case was
then put to the accused under section 313 of the Cr.P.C. and
in the written statements filed by way of their defence they
denied the allegations in toto and on the contrary put up a
counter version that Hanumanthappa and Siddeshappa had
not been present at the time of incident and that the other
three accused had been assaulted by Thimmappa deceased,
PW3 Devendrappa and one Manju Nath and that they had
caused injuries to Thimmappa in their self defence.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.