High Court Karnataka High Court

Manjunatha vs State Of Karnataka By Chintamani … on 27 May, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Manjunatha vs State Of Karnataka By Chintamani … on 27 May, 2009
Author: Jawad Rahim


-1…

IN THE HIGH COURT 03-‘ KARNATAKA AT BAf§_§’:P._§;Q§V?§_E”V«’ ” %

DATED THIS THE 27″‘ DAY OF MAY,..2,§i§*3*.9V ‘ If _ 3 T

asmae j %
me HOWBLE MR. Ju:-‘mes 3A_WAD ‘ V
1 MAMUNATHA ;

s/<3 aasaasemmpazg % 
39 YEAEES     %
2 :=4:;:~¢;*a:;é.;é::« %      
S/i}_VDi3E§i§.51-$f£ET}fiAVFPA 
6,: ¥EAa$v_V   "

3 :vzuN:sv#A:v§Y'k%%     
Si0V'9§3DAS_EETHAf?VPA

35: YEARS   %

 .  _ 5 }':§<£?J;SHNAPf5A"'     * '

   Sg't}..LtC}'E=i3ASEE1'HAP?A
A A 33§'%'5"5*W=7 

% ‘ ma&.%Aé=;.:s3¥=:/0 KAIWARA VILLAGE
Ci=§1N”i”‘AMANITALUK AFPELLANTS

aims.srii~%.a.aaAt~:3uNDA csewwa, ADV.)

f ..$*§’ATE GF KARNATAKA
av CHINTAMANI Rum. macs Rsspermerw

{By Sfi RAJA SUBRAHMANYA BHAT, HCGP)

§_\;{2»_/’

” –Ft3L:..C}¥”:€E5~ifi:._

-3…

‘ms cam 15 meg u/s. 3}’4(2)(a) CR.§3,.£2,4’5.’fT§-{E u
ADVQCATE FOR THE APPEL£.AN’T$ AGAENST *
3um=.-Mam” DT. 2S1’26.6.2G03 mssen av ma IIj*AE’:Di…j
0151. AME 5.3., ace-we. IN s:=L.c*a:.r~zc2i.»% Js1,:o1.

ccawrcmee me APPELLANTS/ACCUSE£’i_1«.T§} 4 “FL1*R’THE”‘.
orwremcm pxuxss. 3(1)(x§)A!*~!D 3{1)(‘x}..~QF..SC/$T”(¥?§}fii.}_*
ACT, RIW 3»: IPC mp SEC. 324 ‘Rfw 34 GFIPC .ar~:§=,
ssmremcms THEM To uuofimo 5.:-. mré. A maazou: as , %

one YEAR AND PAY A F1243 ‘as Rs.1,s39i3x-3Ar~:”9 IN
DEFAULT as PAYMENT 05 Fmefro. UNQERGO FURTHER
3.1. ms. THREE MOE-“”fi:iS F<3'R%%§1+£-:F.%9FFE:v::Es P;'U:'S.
3(1)(xi) or st:/err (POA}."AC'!_' F¥;.r*w"'5'r*3C;~.34 or we. AND
sememcaa T0 unaeaea 5.1;?oa3 or one
YEAR Am 913?!’ AFINE tzzms. 1.«i3i3.Gi–‘A?~!i§.”Efl DEFAULT 0?
PAYMENT o:= we “re Lnnoeam ‘Fs59.f:’s+;£R 3.1. 903 mass
mums Ft3R1_Ti-ii”_{IvFFEhiCES_..?fU:’S.””f3(1)(K) or SCXST
(PQA) ACT WW’-“‘-$E5. AND FURTHER
SE2\i’¥”Ef€CED–.T<:*. gsrmfiase. 3.1; Fm A PERIOD or 0945
YEAR AN'E'J"PAf'f:F\ Fiééfi €3E'P:S. manor» Am: IN DEFAULT 0?
pmvgessrr :3? FE?s:E.,_m uswgase FURTHER 5.1. ms. mass
:'v'£<3NTH$ FQ_R'TH"£.Vi3FFENCfE'S. P/uis. 324 ms: sec. 34 or
19¢. . =

.."rH1s%camzaeAL*A. ,A?'§EAL comma ON FOR FINAL
HEAfi;ING~ THIS.£}A'r',.. THE comm' aeuveaeo THE

is against the judgment in Spi.

L C.tZ;’%ia..Sv3.2’G§dated 25.6.2003 an the me of II Afidi.

“”=. “i>.ist:ic£wiudae, Koiar ccmvictina them fer ofieirrcfi

V :._é’p;i’r:§.’s§:abie imder secztiesn 324 8:. 565 Rfw sectiarz 34 cf IPC
V% ..a:?§é Lméer Section 3(1)(x) af SCIST (PGA) Act, 1989.

-3…

2. Heard bath §§€5&§. The 21n—cantrovar*ted…f#¢f§’ :§«%é~

PW2 K.i~’xnjana§pAa iadgeé retmrt at the ¢:a:r:’:’;V:r_i_a”‘i’:ff{ai’v:’i.V’§T’fivériétfifi

staticm at Chiniamani Rum Pumice :§iétiéh._Va’5i_eai:fiA4§;_”

his wife PW3-Van kataiakshmamrfi, .§A.a’uef’i:?t_v«:-,.i”A’ – ” L

Devamma izaeianq ta scheduie’c:%.}:.§:a.ste Vhanxji aré= Eév§§Vié§V by
prefessicn. They’ We in” K§iw3:’a”‘ _whi’1iéVt’f:e”V:accused
cf the Same viiiage beiéfia’ At
ahcut 10.0% éccompaniefi by
his dauQhte?”f1’é_r§.§é’éée té.i’::;:ibiié fi§%Vrk.’ Hi5 wife prcceeded
fufthéfi~ffI'”Vf&géi.fi.’.’V;§§;&f éauahter. He had
gone e%v§1&’i5€?ierév:i§ra:’3f§{te:”s:df’A;:¥§§iié work. He further aiiegefi

that the a?’-§*:r:~*.=,.2se’:dVV:Varv$sAie:.i,_J’§té’§ his wife with a stick ‘white she

$9 féiéi’i1—.:is:a:’£er anci when she questianeci the

far:€:}§ed’v.v;§eh§r’-. assautted her dauashter, she was again

a$:éa Gited§ v’V§:”§jfl ‘3’viV.i¥”ti’Ie¥” aiiefied havinfi came ta kiww if the

i:’:cifi:ér;t fiwher: he auesticzned than they assauitw him

r?,»’z,e, 3&3»

V’ i~fjainséL;’«–..ATiié ether aiiegatians that there was ifiwiil baween

– = s f’\

tfm éficused am hm famiiy as thaw beiona to law caste and

V Ed in fact abused them.

(3%

-4-

3. The femur: was reeisterefi. aurina–.___the

ffiiféfiiifiétiéfi Felice Cifficer visited the piace af 0Cfifi’f§§fi:ta

ané prepared 3:291: mahazar, éeézed the matafiais

the charge sheet. .

mm.

4. The 3£:fit.iS&d was subj§cteci*t_c:i”triai, v§§;1i£?a

the iifesécutien examined in a’ii.,j;a’§ _witr:’a:.s$_és”ar:fi piamd

reiiarsca can 19 documéfits ariAc:’31 ¢:’Vi’;}’t-4.*.:4._V§’fiét.ariai The
accused denied the char§ e 7 ivtfieir innoceme.
The Triai ccz;::*Ej;;. i’é;ie«:;%_ieci} ‘%héw and accepted
Bféfiéfiiifififl .A.éir :&v:;~Vr:,_¢;.:-i:eVtc’x« them guilty, which they have

assaifed i i’iu._ifii$ épziéf.- i’A;

5¥5.E_.;i;earned'”€:c;:.rsséi for the armeifants weuié contend

tfiét –t.he..,évifie §’1’ca brauaht cm retard by fhe nrasecution is

tfiafisfih Vfinjanaaspa, PW3 Venicataiakshmamma and

‘.V_Fw4″‘Ee§a_n§:;r1a. Their version in evidence is canfiictlna. In

“f_’E3”:fl§S “«–£T”é§%i’é referefica is made 12:: the fact: that PW2

.5;%ajfi¥iA3;3§38 in urzéquivecai ‘EEFFTTS, aiieqed that revert Ex.P.2

‘ Eééniy an the basifi of the statement given :0 him by his

wife Venkfiataiakshmamma. He was mat a witfiess ts any

cf the ificident in which Devamma er Ventakatalakshmama

§{3/

-5-

were assauited. As far as assauit to him i3 cencerrééd; “§3Vé*

mere-iv aiieraed attempt an him ané did fiat atieatjiedv

afisauii. Réfeffififi is eviéence cf \f:-:er:’i<»::taia–I§§a1§fifi§:§i5:§2§fia;'_fit '

is ureeé she is not an eye witness iE:'ci€ie:jt..i'p§ 7f

Devamma was fitifiaiiitéd #31" Arijiaaajijiapzzta 35:35 as$é;ii€¢d*; 'She
has eniy Sfifikéfi far herseif whVic:!:VV:i§~.ai5§: nét"s«:i.;}p9§'ted by
any irrdegzzerséent witnesf._Hé'~ti1éraf6%§ A.$ :EE§RS acquittai of

the accused.

6. Sri ..’§i’}1’aé:?§:,”‘i’ear:1ed Government

bieadertiisum:.<e:«riS '::ifi§:=:L:it"nj§'t:§fis:fi érder.

2'… Keéf5in_:a: ire'.'mii2d 'i$¢hat is timed, I have examined

.1 "'evivdé%i;:a"vr:nri~..Arer:c§V:*ci""'éhd reasons assigned by the triai

§.u'é.¢;.é;ATA "

5. is no dispute that Pwz Anjafiagoiaa is ‘net an

VV’ “_;é§r-.1:L..s(§:iti?iss tn the assauit an his wife er his dauahter

–‘ fiefiafizma. As painted (mt by the iearrzefi ceunsei, reading

T “éfj his statement stmws that he was away wher: his

3 daughter Bevamma is aiieqed is have gene is fetch water.

Therefare, eviéence cf PW4 Bevarrzma is materiai. Her

WL

-5…

versian reveais that rm 15.3.1991? she had qo:’f;’.e__”4:*.V:’c;’:’f”e’;’;.:Vfi’i*zV.

water far ccmstruction wcrk. Whiie she was g§§_’$n;§7’as§é;;§ited

the ::he$i:. She supfilemefité» s£”atV&:11$.fit_:§;:é§jVi’fic’V:the ‘V

accused ?~é::2.1 had bee§;..§gliew«i:yG fine fiast aiv;-i.=.<:r. Due
te assauit she sufi'ere§: if;ji.2§Ie§"V:§:n::f%f«§:;=.:.§ih§st and ether
accused ran av-fa§fé:from;;tfé e;'

9. accufi-ed No.1 anti
fiéfié e§%.e. ‘_v1’_9iixef’::*ea*VVi:§_i’s;:’c§’é.f_i:é§aticsr:HV’aaaénst Accused Nc:.2,, 3
Sim’ 4. €”i’:_e ‘gardsaééigfiéfii’*%i§s”‘.breuaht in medics: eviéemre

threuegh -tQ_”‘5’5té’%:ii§h PW4 haé suffered muitipie

“i’nj:,;i*i’a;S Etfiv c%”*ze§.Ht .WA EXP}. is the medics! cerfificate of

Pwl 92*. iavarrthi. The Better foam

‘* thé faiiesgi Qfrijuries:

AA _ 1} :Tender2’zes3 over the ieft tempie region.

V’ 3(2) Scratch marks 8 in an. over the sternum scab

farmatimi each measurirrfi ‘/4 cm in ienfith.

(3) Terzderrmss over the ieft hip region.”

W!
W ;

3.0. The Doctevr has described the irzjuries a’$…Vs:§-:’;’fi::.i_e

in nature, which dces net sugapart staternentiif”?¥fii§?§__”.&§._”‘_

inéiscriminate assauit by accuseé nag: t¢.«cau1$ je_.:fi*:§:it§pE§” ‘=

injuries her chest. Ir: Ex.?2 th e r:ja:9.:§;fl:*e \§

fiascribed as superfiueus =3n.¢£; s§*i’:ail” in _}’£’h e

measurement given and the siié«.<,§f !r_1j1.t:;i.a'a's.. :ié "1/41"' cm in
mmth, er: the ci1es't;.. fj~ _§.}*i?:ér;3:,:§tec3'§ $f;~% her versian £5
exagaeraticn cf the ingiéy-:éhi. Ej«¥gn' "if itV'–'ha'd occurred as

aaseged and %M_;§_'g%1;,,,as%%us¢-,dk%'ks;§%;:;:AVsisjmés couid not have

been c§.¢'1}§éd. . }'S§ 'tije P*fi'3"véntakataiakshmamma is
cancerfiéfi; new oniv with regard in assauit

on heVr_ ;:e;r"s;&:-2': ur2$ts.pf3~::'ft€:15 by medicai evidence. Aii that

di_sA;:3eshé'évv——§–s«'havirza heard cf assauit on her

_'éaViifihtér:_:P'£fN-4:fig-:vamma, thmugh c:w13 Mahmhwara and

C'W_1 J«i i_a.'i§§§1i;f§é5'a§21ma, she apfiraacfied accused 519.1, but

K__he a'é.~sa :3{téd her with stick on her right shouider. The

VA " _ i'£'Af_&Vt§"i's£'_.ai éviéeneie threuch PW1 §':rr.3ayar:thi shews injury;

19(1) Tenéerraess ever the fight scapuiar regicn".

11. In crass~exan2inaticsn the déctar admits that na-

, axtemai injuries were and his abservatian is an the

i

-9…

by the victims were sirrmie in nature arm! mt

nature. Therefore, invakim Sectier: 324 aftvifitt:

them W&S itséif imprwer.

14. 53 that as it Vfney, éiéeii’ ‘|:fiOi.} §i’%.:._’v’£h&}’é i s

eviéerzce, it is mint bereft of;”:’r§:}as:;»raab£’e’~. The
benefit unéaubteéiy aéa§f’io_ fhe2.j_a§{¢:2s§2.fif’.*%

15. iéentaa-., I :fi~:2«4;§_jfthe.’f§;:d.ihvg }*:éébrded by the

iearned triai jV1£.§:ia’é;’%h1¢ridi:i:aittfiét __%r;;;i$éfi”‘fiio.1 tr: 4 cuiity of

charae 34 of the IPC, as
aiss ui’i’:§_ef _ii5C neeés interference and
accaréirsaijf LE–t. i5-sét«~_3§:d’e;.. l”‘

_f 5*.::§, ‘C§mifié’tzxiiée charge under section 36) (X) cf

th锑S§Zf the eviéerrce which i have discussed

ré’v e: a%s V1-.”v:é*§%’:jé*;”:V;:i=. brine aiieaed acts of accused within the

‘.Vmi’5cfiir;fV”‘Vs:;f hééctibra 3 cf the Act. Hence, the theme itseif

.]f+~;l;s’~mi5§ar:ceived. It is strange that tried judge with:-at

‘««’–‘t§iL;§§9é’AAbeina any evidenfié an recoré has prcrceeded ta

A A ~. ” Eénvict them.

$3

W16-

:7. In the razsit, aweat is aiiewed.

jufieemerzt by which the accused are f¢1:.Ii:’§~–..,g:é.i{t’;§4_ férf

efferxce punishabie under sectiar:

3¢ of the rm is set aside. Sp ais§$”–f§f–..the gmce* fiif:&ér ‘=_

sectier: 3{i)(x) cf the SC/ST». Act. “‘i’*1~, 1e”‘ a’3c:’;Vij§o¥.V-fit are
acquitted sf at? cha:=em”*:.’~~..The_<'ii¥%i}' are énféiéféd ta be
cafzceiled. 'A 'L n n