High Court Karnataka High Court

State Of Karnataka vs Panjada S Chinnappa on 5 October, 2010

Karnataka High Court
State Of Karnataka vs Panjada S Chinnappa on 5 October, 2010
Author: K.Sreedhar Rao B.V.Pinto
I

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATEE} THIS THE 0521: DAY OF' ocroem 2015.

PRESENT

THE .'£~iON'BLE MR JUSTICE ;.«:~sR.3Et:§I'§1}5x '11>"T:'-ém'   

ANE) M .  
THE HONTSLE MR;;fU$lCE'BgV".}?IN'i'Cr :""~ww 

CRIMINAL APPEAL oi? 

BETWEEN :

STATE op,' ;:ARNA':§A;§A§j',.:: , ~  5
BY THE SUQJNSPECPOR Q9, ' 
poucs,' MAI3~!-HERE-.RUR1§L_  A

r>0L1c1>:,s*£fAf:f:o1~':.'   ..

(E51 SiéilH.;'S.QfifiN§§R;§MOL¥I§, SPP).

1.

, ._1F5PLNJADAV’S.w€f:}§IINDJAPPA,

-.,_@ ANnA;AH, S/’USUBBAIAH,

AGED 46«YEARS,

_ ‘AGi2;V{:ULTUg1s’r,
._ ._MAaENAn*v1LLAGE,
A mpgxgax TALUK.

‘ V 2. KALERAMMANA THAMMAEAH,

.. s/0- MANDANNA,
” . “AGED “22 YEARS,
‘ FJEADENAD VILLAGE,
MADIKERI TALUK. RESPONEENTS.

(BY SRI.SHAN’I’HARADDY S MULIMANI, ADV)

v.

/f

… APPELLANT.

4
produced M03. 1 to 11. The defence of the accused was one
of total denial and they had examined. DWS. I to 3 and got
marked Exfl-1 to 913. However, after heaxing the

prosecution and the defence, the learned Sessions.[‘§§2;;dge

has held that the prosecution. has not

beyond zeasonable doubt and acquitted both

the ofiences for which they stood charged. ”

The State is in appeal. V

5. PW-1 is the the”

deceased. He has givers,’ corapiaiiiieiz 14.i.96. that
on 13.1.96 at about A-1 came near

their house hQI;1in.g g’ embhakam. It is

stated in the -‘threatened him if
Prabhakar is no’t aes:§éj1a!§1e– ad} of them. On that
nextvday, i.e.;oi1 14. a.m., when his father was

goieg * Manda] Wadhan by name

Nagesfi; also accompanied him, when

TV reachegl me cafied ‘Eiebaxe bane’ in Madhe

‘ in front of them holding a gun. At that

V 4fi:.-fie, :TShubhB1{8I’ was going fvom the iand side. On

father of the eompIaman’ t, A-1 asked him to

son. He ftirther stated that if he does not show his

v-.

6

6. PW-2 is Monnappa. He is a distant relative 9f the

deceased who has siwcd E:-:.P~2 inquest ..

conducted on the dead body of the deceased’ ~

PW-3 Chondamma is the wife of ” ” V

She has stated that immediately an 11t§arie;1g«’ee»1;’11e

gun shot, she went to the seeI”xe_V of ;;zt,\§th;at ;

time, her husband had fallen xygitfi on the
lower part of the _ Sine éhubhakar
informed her that_ A~1 %1;.as;’e:ee_ ea her husband.
Thereafter, tee to the hospital.

7. “‘aei1,ef§1ef»eye witness who has
also 9£e§’ence at about 6.30 a.m.,
A-1 has s}.;:».oi; e by means of gun MO~1.

Immediatelfl -3 reached the spot , so also

**** “He has further stated that he is a

:E }{.~”P-3 mahazar under which empty cartridge

z.iJ3:i”‘i$rac1e ‘V’£§§e.fe seizeti by the police. He has identifieti the

weapoteeeineed by Av} and the articles M032 to 5.

— * VT It is in his evidence that when the accused tried in

at the deceased he came in fmnt of the deceased and

u Wfequested A-1 not to shoot at the deceased. However,

V’

7
when he came away from the front side of the

A-1 shot at the deceased Ganapathy.

9. PW–5 Kuttappa has also ‘Of _

occurrence immediately after ttxe §1cide1;t’1

informed by PW~4 Shubhaltzar AK-«I

gun shot at (Franapathy. Thefeafiser, he.;s§ssi§§tmk’v: ‘Htiiem in ‘V

iifiing the injumd to the (.’!’]f’iVV’i”t found
the injured has succunztbed

10. the scene of
offence He has also stated
that fired gun shot
and aelgeé Themafier the deceased was
shifted mg At 4′ V

.. 11; has also reached the scene of ofiimce

.A after the incident. He has stated that the

inj’i1;ec{“‘s§}4§:e__ égpéalaug and told that A—1 Chinnappa am.-1

shzitt ‘v”1;11eteai’!:er, the infiured Ganapathy was shifted

toveltdadikexi hospital.

tt PW–~8, PW–9 and PW-10 have turned hostile and they

M ttave not supported the case of the prosecution.

12. PW-11 is the photographer who has wken the

photos of the deadbody of Ganapathy. PW-12 Dr.

7*

9
the voluntary statement, A-1 led PW-17 and pachayathdars
to Marienadu and in the pmscncc of panchayathdars he

has seized the: gun as shown by Avl as per the mahazar

Ex. P~4. Thereafter, gun was subjected to

the experts and after the arrest of A»2 and sub;s$§:5&111.*:,z:i:t1_i’,i?;’ié.i;i:’i

completion of invcstigatiozi and alsp “£331.

experfs mport, he handed over

his successor. P’W– 18 Asst. * L’

Director, FSL, Bangalqrc. xHex:A’I1as”–~§tat<:£ti" on the

request of the police, 'hbs gun and has

stated that th¢_'pr_.csen.éé"of:": bf' smokeless gun

powder residuzigwas of SBBL (Single
Barrel Bullet $30. It) and it bears the
signs of diggiiaxgc, hilt' bpiiiioiii is possible regarding the

actiiial He has. further stated that he

zihas V béixfifidges from the laboratory and

[V *v.':_'$AA¥.'itvIf'V(.5;"3SSf1}1A1'}*'«_' tesfE:ecI_vn1fhé SBBL gun and has observed that the

is; in' Working condition. He has further given

iev:ae§¢g imiéic the court that he has examincti the articles

of; worn by the deceased and also the Led pellets of

cartridge and opined that the said pellet could

héive been fired by smooth bore fin: arm like M04. It is

10

further stated that the scorching, biackening and

arotmd on the Event side of the swcatm: in

and the diameter of dispersicm of pellets o:1’_§iia$. K

of the sweater approximately _j * «

the gun. However, he has stated f4haAt ‘i_t is

furn.1’sh as towhcthcr the Vyge has V

been fired through th¢»..V_$33L”‘gu;1 Sag-1. ‘Se issued
ceztificate and has fine court during
his ” ._

15. ::3_1:as_ that she has
conducttzdv the dead body of
:o13. figs stattxi that 40 small size

circle holésé Wcré’ 511 the skm’ of the deceased and

_ she }takenV”outfi:;I1o&I:w«3 than 40 pellets from the deadbody

(1}f«t.’1:V1c: from the various parts of the stomach viz.,

the skin, 5 pciicts from lower part of

ab&om,e:§.; zrpeuets from right thigh. 5 pellets Emm left thigh

auxin a1$<')¢ pellets from other parts of the stomach and 12

in around the small intestine. She has further

that MO-1 gun could cause the said injuries and

the death is due to gun shat.

5-».

15
deceased and themfcme, we hoid such an act has been done
by Ad by sudden pmvocation. Therefore, the ofience
Conitmitted by Accused No.1 courses Within Sec.304–i

However, on the re-ap§mciation of evidence on

do not find any material against A4 for .

either for the offence under the ” ‘V

the Arms Act.The:vefo1e, his

interference. _ .

In the result, the fo11owing:c:’der;\– _

22. The appeal’ 1;; Ttdtewnoxder of
acquittal passed_agaias_t.. jvvitil is convicted

for IPC and sentenced to
u11dergc’ii_gcrousV.Vi.i:t§)1+ie}cz1:i:rsei1t for 5 years and to pay a fine

of dhefaiiltftlndergo simpie imprisonment for

. «. 5 He is convicted for the ofience under Sec

= Anus Act and sentenced to under to

1ig94’rVcu$.iIi1j§_rieonment for one year. 330th sentences to run

concmfienfly. The period of sentence undergone by A-1 as

“id triai prisoner is gven set off lmdr:-.1′ Sec.428 Cr.P.C.

directed to smmnder before the Trial Court to serve the

‘balance sentence and on his failure, the Trial Court is

directed to execute the sentence imposed on accused No. 1.

(.”)$g

16

The appeal against A-2 is dismissed.