9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 2007X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Code were sentenced to undergo a simple imprisonment for a period of fifteen days and a fine of Rs. 200/- was imposed, in default of payment of fine they have to undergo further simple imprisonment for a period of one week; iii. Under Section 504 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and have to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and a fine of Rs. 1000/- was imposed, in default of payment of fine they have to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of fifteen days; iv. Under Section 326 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code, each of the Accused were sentenced to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of four years and shall pay a fine of Rs. 6000/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months. 4. Before we delve into the merits and analysis of the case, it would be trite to refer to the Prosecution's case. On 29.08.2008, when the village fair was ongoing, the Accused no-2 (Dharmareddy) picked up quarrel with P.W. 2 (Hemaraddi), wherein the second Accused threatened to finish P.W. 2 (Hemaraddi), but this was pacified with the intervention of the persons present there. On the same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ehalf of the Appellants contended that the prosecution case is full of contradictions and the material evidence available on record is highly inconsistent and the order of the High Court, reversing an order of acquittal, is unsustainable. Learned Counsel has also apprised us about the existence of a compromise entered into between the parties, but it is not possible under law to give effect to the same and compound the offence as the offences charged are not compoundable Under Section 320 of Code of Criminal Procedure. 9. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State supported the impugned judgment of the High Court convicting the Accused-Appellants. 10. Heard both the counsels. As the offences alleged are not compoundable, notwithstanding the fact that the parties have entered into a compromise, we will deal with the matter on merits. 11. Before we proceed further to peruse the finding of the High Court, it is relevant to discuss the power and jurisdiction of the High Court while interfering in an appeal against acquittal. It is well settled principle of law that the High Court should not interfere in the well reasoned order of the trial court which has been arri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nil), P.W. 16 (Yallappa), P.W. 4. (Shivareddy), P.W. 13-(Manjureddy) & P.W. 6 (Devareddy) intervened to rescue the victims. It is pertinent to note that, P.W. 1 during his cross examination contradicted the above statements made in his examination-in-chief. 16. The victim P.W. 2 (Hemareddy) stated that on 29.08.2008, the Accused No. 2 (Dharmareddy) abused him and threatened to kill him in the evening at around 5 pm near Hanuman Temple, but this was pacified by the intervention of P.W. 4 (Shivareddy) and P.W. 16 (Yellapa). But again at 9.30 p.m. the said Accused persons apprehended the victims near the house of P.W. 14 (Vardhamangouda) and started abusing the victims in relation to the pending dispute between the parties. Thereafter, the Accused No. 9 (Mallareddy) assaulted the complainant-P.W. 5 (Sanjeevareddy) but not P.W. 2 (Hemareddy). Accused No. 1 (Bannareddy) also assaulted Sanjeevareddy on the left palm. Accused No. 7 (Ramappa) assaulted Sanjeevareddy with a club on his head and other parts of the body. Accused No. 3 (Hanamareddy) assaulted Lingareddy on his hands and head with an iron rod. The other Accused persons were dragging the victims towards the other Accused person ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry may be the motive behind the assault. Although the victims were followers of P.W. 14-(Vardhamangouda), who was the chairman of the panchayat at the time of incident, but surprisingly he has not supported the case of the prosecution. Further it is to be noted that, there existed prior enmity between the Accused-Appellants and the complainant victims regarding boundary of their land. The dispute has been continuing for the past 10-15 years which could not be resolved even with the intervention of the other villagers. 21. It is to be noted that certain actions of the victims were inexplicable drawing our suspicion specifically the behavior of the victim after the incident. It is an admitted fact that after the said incident the victims were taken to the Government Hospital, Navalgund. As P.W. 5 (Sanjeevareddy) sustained simple injuries on his right shoulders thereby he was not referred for any further treatment. P.W. 2 and P.W. 3 having sustained injuries in their head were referred to the KIMS Hospital, Hubli for further treatment. But the trial court noted that no documents or certificate regarding the admission or treatment of the victims to this effect were placed on record. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th these Accused, provisions of Section 149 Indian Penal Code will not be attracted. 25. The High Court has failed to take note of the fact that the panchas to the seizure panchanama have turned hostile. Although the investigating officer seized weapons which were identified by the victims and certain eyewitnesses, however, it is pertinent to note the all the witnesses have turned hostile except P.W. 1 and P.W. 13. Although P.W. 1 (Siddappa) in his cross-examination stated that he could recognize the weapons in M.O. No. 1 and No. 2 as he has seen them, but contradicted his own statement by stating that he could not say any special features of the weapons used in the offence. Further P.W. 13 also recognized the weapons as the same used in the assault. But it must be noted that, P.W. 13 seems to be an interested witness considering his relationship with P.W. 3. In such circumstances, wherein the panch witnesses have turned hostile, it is not safe to rely upon the recovery of these weapons to substantiate the guilt of the Accused persons. Further we are suspicious about the collection of blood samples, especially when it is an admitted fact that the incident took place on a mud road ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
