High Court Karnataka High Court

Mahadev Ramu Parit vs The State Of Karnataka Rep By Spp on 10 June, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Mahadev Ramu Parit vs The State Of Karnataka Rep By Spp on 10 June, 2008
Author: Jawad Rahim


‘.3

SENTENCING AF?EE.LAfiT,!’ACCUSED i’VE(3.1 TO UNDERGO R.’2;’–.»FGR
1′ YEARS, APPELL}?.fi3TjA{.’IC.’USED §-18.2 TO UNDERGG SJ, [FOR A

PERICEEB (SF 5 Y§AR’$ FGR THE OFFENCE ?UP€I$HA8i…E U}’$:’.’30’?

R/W, 34 19:; AND Fi.iRTfiER SENTENCIM5 APPELLAf23T1″A*CjC3EJS:?£)”‘ _
l\iO.1 TO umnenso R1. FOR 6 M{3=’.NTHS_ fiu’!_D* ‘ _
APF’ELLANT,’AC<3USED Iva: T0 UNDERGG $.}..F!ii%R"6; %§é3rx:":':-is' . "
FOR At»? QFFERCE PUNESHAELE airs. SECT"E{}?~é '3¢?j.0T*'..
IPC. 3cm; THE smrgmcss SHALL Rm: CQNt3UR_REN'fl__Y.-, f

This agpeai caming oi': fGf'heaf§'n§'this é .¥a5§r,'..ihé

delivered the fwlawifig:

Cenvicted accugég./.A_ ‘§%i’i.._:§;;:;ea¥ éa$ ivi”:$t the
jzzdgement pasgeé by §.’;$i.2rt, Beigaum
in sessiens cg*se”«A1.r¢%~;,5ié.x2a=:Eo’ ér”G?;J;_1T§D2 Cafzvigtinfi tha
appeiiarztg ,f figfiishabie under Seczticn
307 9!’ t}§’é “iPC:.§4a?;aé::§§i£§’§ ::?é::fEia;)’r{3¥’i}fléf the 19:;

“E-4’ie5arz’:i : ceunsei, Sri,K,P, Shiva

Prasaéfior {ma ‘a;:g&iia*:§t:~~~’:nd sri, Ramesh Kumar, iearneé

” ~r.§0vé.f:§:r:?;s{ntV..?£e2aA$érv;**fn 36? read with Secticn 34 G?’ ti’_1..&__ ;e”§:§ia_i§°:”st*«'[

the said judgement, the accused: ars;-J éppgiaé; ”

6. Learned agvipeiiantsf geunseiv’C*:>:1tet:fié1t§3ét tfére

is absaiutaiy no materiai evieiei9i’i;Ve:’%’i:€:_Vbrii1§.’Aiétafiusigbetween

the acts cf the a<:c:u's§; ;i . argd efV'Airfi§.;ries by
fiacesaheb or MaA::§s§1a.'_…._§-i eV Manisha, the
ccmpiainarzt vébgariy aémitted she
reached assauiteé airzé
Vtai-can as an eye-witnéss
a:::mnt, ~ $§'miiari:;;%AAI%j§;é:_'¢:§§fi}:;'::cis that eviéerzce of PW-4 I

daes ,::@t_ inffiséh tévhfifiefiée as he aim reached the snot

' "'i'at ei*'; 5»*i??.'§tfi*;.."_:=eegaAi= éWit} nature bf ihjurlm mffered by

ccmtenticn that the injiiries ware found to

be A$–§.lfVr°}[:)i_E *§l:'§ fE'?:3:'1£UfE! and therefzzre, charge of effence under'

T """–. Ee;::tia2'{ SS7 of the IPC was impreper 3:13 the iearnefi Trial

A j;§udgé.~'has aisa seriousty erred in ignering materiai evidence

,;::_:f15 retard which disrneis aii aiiegatierss abaut intentirm in the

' mind nf the accused to km the '\.iiCZi¥'¥'1$. He wasufd corztené

aw

V' "c.r'dit:a'%yi»–.ct:u'rsAe at héiiite to cause death.

V –Vthat1'én..féf:e'ténce from Primary Health Centre, he admitted
K vtiaosaheb and feund fcsiiowtne injuries and he was

on admissier: ts the hc:-s;ftai:-

F \

K51}

examinefi a5 ?W–: and Dr. Deegieak: Madhukar Katttbie
examineé as PW-3′ 59th at thesa cmctérs have
and treated the victim pw-3, E
12, As per evidence at PW-1 — D2′,
when _PW–3 was groduced before
6,03 p.,m., he found the fc:¥i0va;.§’ng. i!’1j4i=i&’§’i;t2{}’S§-‘–:- ‘ t. V t. ‘V

” (3) Cat iacerated vv:3untiVt’t§}etr_theV’it-.. Qcéigttai
ternbcrai reéiera méa_$urind”s’*.Z’§; 1″: V

(b) Cut iacerateé°’w_<mm§vVé§aQ:t».€);S ';=:.Q.5 cm

ever the iefi:»5§d& G:.f'*t*§2€2:':h&$t»,'_" I

HeAdgscribed"t.hsé&..jh§u'ries 33 simpie in nature and

aczimits i.nLc:r«§fs'::{1exafnitiat¥6%: that they were not sufficient in

, %'"3,3; "'V".'T;'hé.:='é§}idence cf Dr. Beépak Madhukar a<amt:;e ;s

at

and his famiiy members. The Parties were agitating the

matter in cm: court is aise not my admitteet…ey.4'_:'the

accused but the accused want the Cetirt te

statement. In fact, the accused heiée

copy cf the document reiating pA'f'eeeed,ih'§e';~~;VVIt tsjaisc '' V

hot in dispute that e evhehnei theivheeiee ef A1
and Raeeahet: and hit feihtiiy usirsg the said
ehermei fer wete-;rfQttv_ irriéetiefittieit«.i'f€%.htt; accused were
unhappy cf; 'Vettfi Vtiterefere, they after:
preventeei**P\tif .ce«$i.eeti:igi wetert

'PW~3 was eeiiec;-tine water

the is1eiee:;§i§«i.tg%g§;:Veecutrieeitit'Free': this, it is deer that the

._va:h¥itfit§'~sity:'tzetweehthewaccused and the vietim is a geeesie

Vigfetit't'epné2afie:§i'v.Aij'u.errei between them and the incident in

rji.i'eetier:. ".3;}{it.7'vi1.8.99, the accused having feend PW-3

fleeiieetihétztiaiter appears te have attacked him. The pertior:

it "v~Itet:t'he..Abetjy chosen fer the attack is head and ieit parties: cf

ehest. The ebject usefi in the aseauit is axe.

'V V tthdeubtediy, when a person causes injury er: a vitai pert ef

the heady with a weapon iike axe, certainly, has to be

53%

;…$
J;.~.

is hit PW-3 and her overt act is oniy causing isjury to PW-2,

Tbs issrrzed Trisi Judge found her siss guiiiy sf4…§ffsrzs:e

uncier Sectisirz 30? of the IPC because she is _

suppiisd are is A1 regarding

svidsase is cc:z1vin«:ing=

v

20: Heme, it w::i:s.§.d bss”§’mstssis{_ is ‘fés’s’*nsr using

iémvisisn under Sestish far sttemst
an the fife sf fin the basis
of this .’;’;§;n%zi:;::sn sf A2 far sffencs
under $sCtiss.:’:ssfiiifi-§Vs«f impmper and needs
inierfsrsf.-..:ég.’_ his acquitted cf the sffense
unset sS’sst§s’:*:.V3&?VV:sf EEFQC,

‘{hs””‘s.;:Vs_s;tEvsn is what sffsracs she has

‘.__ssV%%ti:’:3§t*n:–ss;» jé§£:a:.s:r*dir:§ is the prssssutisn and victim, she

ss’:.;ss<;i asses sisns an the "wrist sf PW-2 and dsctsrs

'have sssfirnéed it, She wiii therefsrs be iissie fer csmiictién

"'..fg2fiAVd'e::;Ss?stisn 323 sf the IPC and rust Ssctisrs 33?. is far as

ssncsrnsd, on ths basis of what is discussed shave, I

sis: sstisfisd that his sssvictisn under Section 30? cf the I?C

3:1,

;_.1
L2'?

is wsii bsisnssd, susssrtss by rsssssinss sf the is_s__mss

Trisi Judge ass E thsrsfsrs, ssnfirrn the same,

22, New ssmisg to the susstisr: sf ssiif’1%:s:f;r:s.},f’s-“‘i7: :..i’:§_:

seen that A: has been ssntsm:sd'”‘i:–::y If1rssfsVlj:iss–sssVs..A

imprisonment ans A2 hss seen se:r:fsVnsssi”fs if5*1gfs~s.rs. si:-.§fi;::vi’sV._

imsrisonmsnt, As discussed –ssj£res.rs t}”:s__ c;§r:srris–:Vshcés in ”

wfiish the sffsnss has bssfi .cis:¥éfi:T§iit–ssE”‘s~1i3;:ishe manner sf
csmmissisr: 0%’ dffsrrts} “‘sf:é”1V”‘rvsisvsst factors far
::sns§s’srstisi”:_V ssj,-.’;s ‘i2§s%1e{‘t%iisf;’t§1s ‘;».j2s7’rissi sf imprisonment

impssscivsssfi ss%jVV3%2″§s’_juss ssiici prspsr, an ssrssisszrins

sit facts ‘s:3s’– s¥rcgfr’;stVss’s.ss»,«.Vi fiimj the ssntsnss is fssrsh,

Hence, it nss§:isV_}f*sr:3Li’ctisn=锑3&.s rsvgsrds A; is csrassrined, sinss

” V’ i:s’§~r.é,§:’sss¥ssi..Adswri”ifisv charge frsm sffsnss snssr Sestisr:

“3__z’::’?_.tus–~sf._3g3 IPC and as sins is s wsrnsn, she is

sssissssci. s fins sf R.s,5,au’3Qi~ sis: sf which Rs,5U0/«-

‘~-«.__ s.i2sii ss” payable is stats and Rs,4,.5Q0,f- shsii bs said ‘is

yisiém Ls, Evisnishs -~ ?’v’v’-2. As far ss A1 is ccmsemssf,

have ssnfirmss the finding sf the Trisi Csurt thst hs is

u:.”ssiEt<y of the sfismts unssr Ssstisn 3:37' of the IPC, he is

ssrstsrzcsd ts 2 years rigsrsus isssprissnrssswi with 3 fine sf

as