IN THE HIGH comm' OF KARNATAKA AT BA1~pc:p,:;§§1§E '
Dated this the man day of JULY , 2Q(5a[j% A '
PRESENT "W=« % ""'
THE HONBLE MRJUSTICE
THE I-I()N'BLE MRJUSTICE B":VSREENi'VASE-I GQWDA
CRIMINAL !iPuIfEA_L""Ne:."_"f4"?!20O 1
Between:
State by C.O.D__. ~ V
Bangalore. ' _ .
AAAA ..Appenam
{By Sri. G:;Bha§razii ';~§ix*igh} S;§'*;P.; for appellant)
And:
' .V.S}'-o.A
. Age.
'Ode: Agrifiuliufisn
_ Rio. Ifiiamiiada Beedi,
Taxikete.
Somaiah,
S'f'<is. T.S.Rcvenna,
?Age 40 yrs.,
' ' Occ: Bus agent,
R/0. Doddaiah Bcedi,
Tarikere.
3. 'I'.S.Satisha.
S] 0. Shivalingappa,
Rmfiadevara Beedi,
- JUDGMENT -
The material facts of the prosecution
one T.K.Jayaswamy, deceased and reepondentai (A. 'to
A.4) were all friends. However,
used to be difierenccs betweerfthe aceudécd _one
and the deceased on the other.
2. On the mtewenigxg 2991,
respondents 1 to 4 (A. 1 were in the
Mohan Bar V' heated exchange between for raising
respect of function relating to
death of was a scuffle. A. 1 to AA
essaultegd “and vvddafraewamy. A.1 to A.4 planned to
*i,i::’e5i§ient and wanted to show the death of
run over by a vehicle. A.1 to AA took
the oirtside, made him lie on the road in front of
P.W.5 was asked to drive the car over the
Accordingly, P.W.5 drove the car. Respondents 5
V (A5 and A6) are the Police Constables who colluded
4
with A.1 te A.4 and get registered a false case showixggfleath
of T.K.Jayaswamy as one caused by run ever qfby
rash and negligent driving. A. 1 to AA
committing offence under Sec. 302 AV
and A.6 under Sec. 120(8) read
IPC.
3. The post tee death is
due to shock and injury to vital
organs, brain, The autopsy
report as 11 injuries and
the gun-over of a lorry by rash
and » ‘ 4’
me{e:ia1__«en recerd discussed above, evidently
ehOefS” t1;a1;”a:v’4v{«1::iehonest investigation is conducted by the
charge sheet is filed to acquit
View and to secure a formal stamp of
from the Court. The post marten} report evidently
‘ —.eentfe1diets the prosecution version that the death is as a
eesult of assault. F*.W.5 who is supposed to have driven the
ear ever the deceased at the instance of A.1 to A.4 has turned
(3%/,
5
hostile and has not supported the prosecution case. RW. 19
is one lorry driver, who confesses that the
under his lorry while driving, without his not:ice–‘A§’::1.g’I1c3gA1′::I’fj’e’itLe
ierry had run over the deceased. P.\?:’i.”2″(}”isA’ti¢1e ‘a1cf;e:fide’r, ‘V
His evidence testifies to the fact –
deceased were in Mohan Bar, ‘
there was quarrel …_1j_.E1em’. point of
time, P.W.2{} says that, to some
other work. T.K.Jayaswamy
lying under kg; were present. P.W.20
Say?! that. and noticed that there
were biood “of the room and all over the
T0011]. mt as to any of the incriminating
tc__ accused. P.W.28 is a person
sed and the accused. His end’ ence
TV disc1oses–. closing his business, he came to Moh/an
‘ with him, but finds that deceased was
sitting with the accused consumixlg liquor and he
‘T V . _ _ T vfa Ls;’Iiet in a mood to accompany him. ‘Fhcmfom he gets back
On the next morning, P.W.28 finds that deceased was
found dead as he wae run over by a vehicle.
.4.iflYC$’i§é=fi9_i3- V %%%%% e e
.-
0
5. The facts and evidence discussed above, does not
call for mterferenoe with the order. However, the_4vd:i:si1 o:;est
manner in which the charge sheet is placed
conscience. With utmost disgust,__w.e__note’V pr”i3_jdaL _
faeie itxvestigation agency has not ceindfieted
sincerely and faithfully. The sheet
contradictory material with the—-eiiief “§)enefitfing
the accused and to have Gf acquittal from the
6, We ‘ H the copy of the
order be General of Police, and
Director proper action against the
erring Pelieeé ” are asscvciated with the
:\
Sd/–
I d
S13/36
Judge