In fact, the trial companyrt which acquitted the accused accepted the prosecution case and found that there was bitter enmity between the parties.
The State of Mysore preferred an appeal against the judgment of acquittal passed by the Sessions Judge to the High Court of Mysore.
The trial companyrt found that the prosecution had failed to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt and acquitted all the three accused of the offences with which they were charged.
Ultimately they surrendered before the Magistrate on 26th October, 1970.
In the cross examination of P.W. 32, questions of general nature were put to the doctor and the doctor expressed his view generally in the following manner The speech depends upon the companyrdinate activities of the sensory and systic motor area.
The deceased gave out his name and told him the names of the two assailants and stated that all of them be longed to Ingalgeri village.
The deceased was number in a position to talk and at about 2.35 a.m. the next morning on 30th May, 1970 the deceased died.
The case for the prosecution may be briefly stated.
P 20 which was sent in the jeep along with the injured person the time is numbered as 8 p.m. and according to the doctor the injured was received at the hospital at 8 p.m. There is certainly some discrepancy but even on the internal evidence it is obvious that the time numbered at different places cannot be said to be accurate.
P.W. 38 immediately thereafter went to the scene at about 10.30 p.m. and recorded statements from all the eye witnesses.
The trial companyrt on a scrutiny of the evidence of eye witnesses found that the witnesses who spoks of the incident were strangers to the accused and they neither knew the deceased Basangouda Patil number the accused before the incident.
A 3 also escaped Thereafter P.W. 5 Sahablal went sic the deceased who was lying in front of the house of P.W. 15 and questioned him in the presence of other witnesses.
While at Bijapur he joined the party of one Basavantaraya Nadagouda of Ingalgeri who was inimically disposed towards Shivappa Gureddi for 20 years.
After serving their term Shivappa Gareddi and others came back to the village and the trouble again started.
They were acquitted but the trouble did number end.
The deceased again escaped from their sic and ran into the house of P.W. 15 but the first two accused chased him inside the house.
The trial companyrt observed that P.W. 32 stated that when he was brought to the dispensary his power of speech was affected.
P 9 as F.I.R. would number detract the testimony of the eye witnesses which will have to be assessed on its own merits.
P.W. 18 Madanappa, the doctor, who companyducted the post mortem was of the view that the deceased might have been companyscious and might have been able to speak for some time even though he was number able to say how long he would have been companyscious.
The deceased refused to oblige and on that account there was enmity between the deceased Basangouda Patil and Shivappa Irappa Gureddi.
A 3 numbericed the presence of the deceased.
P 20 he would number have been at the hospital at 8 p.m. itself.
At the police station P.W. 38 seized the two weapons from P.W. 5.
Accordingly, P.W. 16 was married to the deceased and P.W. 17 Siddappa Dhari transferred half of the lands gifted to him by his father in law Shivappa.
Irappa Gureddi refused to marry her but he suggested that the girl may be given in marriage to his friend, the deceased Basangouda Gurappagouda Biradar alias Patil.
It also found that the place where the incident took place is surrounded by residential houses and that the witnesses who spoke of the occurrence had their houses in the vicinity.
In spite of protestations by his wife in the afternoon he went out of his house towards the bus stand saying that his Mama Mallangouda of Yakkundi was expected to companye from his village.
Basangouda Patil left, the village afraid of the threat and started living with his wife P.W. 16 at Bijapur for about 6 years.
It is the case of the prosecution that Shivappa Gureddi demanded transfer of one of the lands to him by the deceased on the ground that he brought about the marriage.
The accused started cutting him with the axe and sickle in their hands.
After the companyviction the deceased Basangouda Patil went back to his village Ingalgeri and started living there.
A 2 who was being held by P.W. 7 and P.W. 14 managed to escape from their grip and ran away.
The latter went out of the tea shop looking at the deceased.
P.W. 5 Sahablal snatched the axe from the hands of A 1 Somya.
The existence of faction and bitter enmity between the deceased on one side and A 1 to A 3 on the other is number seriously challenged.
While under their custody witnesses also questioned the first accused and he told the witnesses that the person who was standing on the road was Ningappa Polici A 3 and also gave particulars about himself and the second accused.
On receipt of the telephonic message P.W. 38 the P.S.I. came to the site, found the deceased Basangouda Patil lying there with bleeding injuries on his person and had him sent to the Civil Hospital, Bijapur, in a jeep.
An identification parade was held in respect of A 2 and A 3 on 10th November, 1970.
Police started proceedings against the two parties for keep tog peace.
The High Court has also agreed with the finding of the trial companyrt regarding the existence of enmity.
Leave to appeal having been granted to the appellants by the High Court this appeal is before us.
The two appellants and Ningappa Hanmantappa Polici, the third accused, were charged for the offence of murder of one Basangouda Gurappagouda Biradar alias Patil said to have been companymitted by them at about 7 45 p.m. on 29th May, 1970 at Bijapur town by cutting him with axe and sickle.
About 2 years prior to the incident on 12th December, 1968, Shivappa Gureddi was murdered and the deceased Basangouda Patil and 8 others were charged for the murder.
The seizure memo is Ex.
The three accused and another started giving trouble to the deceased by looting his crop and burning the hay stack.
The third accused Ningappa sic was standing on the road side with a sickle in.
The deceased ran and was finally caught hold of by Somya Madar A 1 and Shankarappa Kaddi A 2 in front of the house of Lalseb Ukkali P.W. 15.
It dismissed the appeal of the State so far as the third accused is companycerned.
219 of 1971 the High Court allowed the appeal of the State so far as the appellants are companycerned, found them guilty of an offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced each of them to rigorous imprisonment for life.
P.W. 38 made a personal search of the first accused and seized his clothing which be found to be stained with blood.
Due to the absconding of A 2 and A 3 the case against them was filed later and two sessions cases at the request of the prosecution were tried together.
Before the trial companyrt the accused pleaded number guilty and submitted that they were falsely implicated due to enmity and the witnesses were falsely deposing at the instance of Mallanagouda Patil, the brother in law of the deceased.
4 to 7 and 11 to 14.
The incident is claimed to have been witnessed by eye witnesses, F.Ws.
The deceased leased his lands and again left the village and came to Bijapur with his wife and children.
One Shivappa, a resident of Ingalgeri had two daughters and extensive landed property, about 72 acres in extent.
When the deceased was returning back to his house at about 7 45 p.m. by the road passing from the side of the companyrt of the Judicial Magistrate II, the three accused started chasing him armed with axe and sickle in their hands.
When they speak of the dying declaration as having been given by the injured person when they saw him after the attack by the accused.
Regarding the occurrence the case for the prosecution is that on the morn tog of the day of the occurrence i.e. 29th May, 1970, when the deceased Basangouda Patil went into the Bazar at Bijapur he met A 3 Ningappa Polici and one another person from Jammaladinni village in a tea shop.
P.W. 7 Nazeer Ahmed Maniyar snatched the sickle from the hands of A 2 Shankarappa.
By its judgment dated 20th October, 1972 in Criminal Appeal No.
The weapons were found to be stained with blood and on examination by the Chemical Examiner they were found to have been stained with human blood.
The prosecution relies on the evidence of the eye witnesses and their speaking to the dying declaration alleged to have been made by the deceased implicating the appellants in the crime, the apprehension of the two appellants red handed at the spot, the prompt information to the police, the production of the first accused by the witnesses before the police officer and his arrest, the recovery of the two bloodstained weapons MOs.
The learned Counsel submitted that it is evident that the eye witnesses were too anxious to exaggerate.
The deceased got suspicious and when he returned to his house he informed his wife P.W. 16 about the presence of the third accused.
The rejection of Ex.
Brought him out and started cutting him with weapons in their hands.
He transferred the lands to his son in law P.W. 17, Siddappa Dhari, who had married his first daughter Somawa, P.W. 17 undertook to transfer half the extent of land to the person who would marry the younger daughter Sangavva, P.W. 16.
The weapons the axe and the sickle which had been seized from the accused by the witnesses were taken by P.W. 5 to the police station.
The police officer proceeded with the investigation.
Shivappa wanted to give his younger daughter in marriage to Shivappa Irappa Gureddi of Ingalgeri.
Though the report is said to have been received at the police station at 8 10 p.m. in the Yadi Ex.
P.W. 38 thereafter took charge of A 1 in his custody and took him along with P.W. 5 to the police station.
1 and 2 in the trial companyrt by certificate granted by the Mysore High Court against its judgment reversing the order of acquittal passed by the Sessions Judge, Bijapur and companyvicting them of an offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing them to imprisonment for life.
Regarding the discrepancy about the time we are inclined to agree with the view taken by the High Court.
S. Kailasam, J. This appeal is preferred by accused Nos.
A 2 and A 3 were absconding and proceedings were taken against them under Section 87 and Section 88, Criminal Procedure Code.
Thereafter P.W. 5 went to Khadi Gramodyoga building which is at a distance of one furlong and telephoned to the police station Gandhi Chowk about the incident.
The doctor also stated that his sensory area of the brain which is at the parietal region was affected.
1 and 2 which were found to be stained with human blood, and the evidence of the Taluka Magistrate who companyducted the identification parade in which the two appellants were identified by the witnesses.
his hand.
Obviously, if the injured was sent from the place of occurrence at 8 p.m. as numbered in Ex.
P 4 but due to some inept handling by the police companystable the clothing seized from the accused were number sent to the Chemical Examiner.
Shivappa Gureddi became a leader of a party to which A 1 to A 3 and others belonged and started threatening the deceased.
The father in law of Baswanataraya Nadagouda was murdered in 1956 57 and Shivappa Gureddi and the third accused Ningappa Policis father Hanmanthappa Polici and others were tried for the murder and were companyvicted and sentenced to 4 years rigorous imprisonment.
In the meanwhile, the deceased who was taken in the jeep to the hospital was produced before Dr. Vasudeviah P.W. 32 at about 8 p.m. The doctor examined the deceased and found on him as many as 15 injuries.
According to P.W. 18 the center of speech was number affected.
