IN THE may comm <14? KARNATAKA AT A. _ DATED THISTHE 26*1'I)AY»QE_?_ u u BEFOREZ'-._ A Q THE Homam MR.JU3r1cEi.: I CRBIINAL APPEAL E WTWEEN: The State V' Appellant Nam 6 Somafira S/o Basappa G Glyrs. 7 (MW . S10 Sotaayya 2931:). 3/0 Salfi ; 2793, . 10 S[aVJ . - anasgryp % Bnmmaavp M] is filed under Section 373(1) 5: (3) Respondents
t::.P;<:. emu: 22-+2002 passed by the
in c.c.m4eo;2ooo wqtmitfing the
Err the oflencea punishable under
delivered the renewing
143', -.147, 143, 504, 427, 335 & 595(2) rlw Sec. 149
x ' appmlcamm m§nhca:mg' tmday.
z':g{I?C,":
.. – ~”
JUDGHENT
This is an appml filed f
judgmcntand order of by
the JMFC, Manddcbihaf in the
respondents are awinst
them Eur the ofimccs 143, 147,
148, 504, 427, me.
2. mt an 16-+2000 at
about M10» accused have rormm
, 5 er the house: of oompxainam
a common object to comwt
towards house of thee oompi t a
A ‘~ h.avcj the clxmgc sheet tbr the afin% afinccs. The
‘ cJmmmcd’ 10 w:tncsscs’ and mm-lead Ex.P-1 to P-
‘V V Than statements ofthc accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C.
/1:”
the guilt at’ the accused, the trial
_ % that Wm a Mam Imam: am: the accused
cmnc in front of an ‘ t’s house am:
cvidcxwfi 133006 on record. has hand that K
acquitted thc rcspondcnm my me
3. 1-mm the m
mspomenm. _
4. It is witnmts
who thmw light P.9Is.3, 4 &
10 an: the cmbclsm-.c1 the
version of §.§:.3, 4 ._which is may mmmct.
Th: 5 ‘fi”‘–…;g’_y4(‘)»V.’.fi oonobommti by the
” _ the cvidnmcc of P.W.1 is
cvxicnoc: %%%% M of P.W.’7 – me doctor who
V’ is conizcmicd that cum though
2′?
smicd abusing him in vulgm The H
on duty took Ramaama – accused $10.10 with 9
tune’ ,thc remain” m’ gaocuscd went at
started abusing file
pcltcd stones at thc house of
the doors and of & 10
cmxobozaizs to thc man:
of ‘mjm’ic:s the trial Judge was
wrong i1:~’£1ctA ‘!’hcn:fi3:r:, the order
villag cclcbrating the last day of
– accused No.10 m:%a
of P.W. 1. In a group, they conmta cf 16
_pc1~§ELw1sv;s§:idv:it«mnnotbcpoas1’b1ctoidenfi’ymchoft};mcmn
” ” ‘ as to who pelted the stones and as on who acunny
the eomphmwt – P.W.l. The trial Court hm not
tm evidence of the docmr which eanubomtts
A ” withthccviricnccofP.\V.1. Thcrcfim:,itisadnn’th:dfactthat
4 .6
a …,
k
‘ :f’;’.¥_Is. 2 £04 sans prayed fin’ dimaissas ofthe appad.
A : ” heaxd me counsel for both parflm, fix: pom
% aequiiml passcd by aw wart mm is pcmme.
there was mm nniawful as%bly with a
mi:-xsng crime and assauzux: tag”
suhmim thatappcal be anowec;
flit afomzncntianod oficnoca. V» . ._ V. ‘
mspondcmas-1 to 10 evidence’ of
promcution wimcsgcaj that the
spot mahamif have
pleaded , that the
oomplm?|an§i1.fiIc:&’ mmm blast the case filed
by the 4 &. 10 herein and
the trial Court is amt
i
compiainmt. P.Ws. 1, 4 & 5
3 in C.C.Ha-.512/2000 on the , T T1» V
time of incident a1®% to the
lodged against, flied this
complmt motive E doable-
– % Ak ,.;jf y has to be pmvcd.
on that day 9.31.: went
mm gave oral complaint and P.w.s
. The evidence ofP..\v.l gacs to wow that
mmg in front of 11’s house: and he
at that time naspondmtarl to 9 took
afinr mm: ammd 6.40 11.13.,
weapons amlfiormedflxcmsclvcsinmanunlawfuiasscxnbly
/1 i %;
, Egg; ,/
_,,.J H .
on tbc person at’ P.W.1 but not an
L of P.W.1 an 4. Except P.Ws.1 m 4
other eye mm 3 who speak with we to
which the incident ofassault took 13130:.
with deadly mama and seam: pom:
oomplainanfs house and injumd 1=-.w.1’s 1:11
he and damaged the doom and A
w1tncssus’ ham: not . the fioncs,
ta ‘}’l:u:n:fo1=c, the trial
Court version of P.w.1 on the
§;rp;w.7 – the docinr discloecs that he
c
8. ‘ I domtfmdmy . orig
tmjudgmmtammueroraoqnnmax’
by the JMFC, Mmdcbihai in ac.no%.m;mm% %
tm@pwlE