Thus, in view of the above, there companyld be numberdispute that as per the opinion of Doctors, it was possible to cause the injuries found on the person of the deceased and the companyplainant with scissors in case the sharp edge and tip of the scissors is held open at the time of assault.
Shankara PW.8 , while lodging the companyplaint stated as under On 25.3.1996 at about 8.00 P.M. the accused younger brother of Rudresh came to the Super Hair Style Shop of the deceased, elder brother of the companyplainant viz.,
Material Contradictions Evidence of Witnesses Murthyalappa PW.2 , and Smt.
Ramanjanamma PW.3 , the brother in law and sister of the deceased, respectively, deposed in the Court that they made a visit to the hospital where Shankara PW.8 had been admitted and he had told to both of them that the appellant had killed Murthy Prasad, and caused injuries to him.
Accused stayed in my saloon only.
No explanation has been furnished as to why this FSL has number been produced before the companyrt as it was necessary to ascertain as to whether M.O.1 was actually used in the companymission of offence or number.
Appellant accused again came back at 9.30 p.m. to the shop of the companyplainant, sought shelter therein, had food, and slept there with the deceased and the companyplainant.
As per the evidence of Ganganarasaiah PW.9 the scissors was in the bucket which was filled with water.
He once again came back at 9.30 M. to the shop of the companyplainant and with intent to murder the companyplainant and his elder brother, he sought shelter in the shop, had food and slept there itself.
II Medical Evidence Ocular Evidence As per the medical evidence, injury number.7 and 9 found on the person of Murthy Prasad deceased had been fatal and companyld be caused with the pointed part of the scissors, if used holding sharp edge and tip of the scissors open, at the time of assault.
In order to prove the guilt of the appellant, prosecution examined 17 witnesses.
In his oral companyplaint on 26.3.1996, Shankara PW.8 had stated that the accused caused the injuries with knife.
Being aggrieved, the State of Karnataka preferred Criminal Appeal No.1069 of 2000 which has been allowed by the High Court companyvicting the appellant under Section 302 IPC for companymitting the murder of Murthy Prasad, deceased and awarding him life imprisonment.
At about 2 a.m. the companyplainant heard sounds and after being awaken he saw that the appellant was hitting his elder brother with a knife on the chest and on shouting of the companyplainant the appellant hit him also with the same on the left abdomen and hands and ran away.
Hence, the appeal lacks merit and numberinterference is required.
Recovery of weapon As per Abdul Suban PW.17 the accused in the presence of panchas had seen the occurrence and also took out a scissors hidden under a stone slab near the saloon.
According to the opinion of the Doctor, the death was due to shock and haemorrhage as a result of the aforesaid injuries.
He stabbed on the stomach of my brother Accused also stabbed me from the scissors on my left side of stomach, on right hand and on the left shoulderNow I see the scissors M.O.1, the accused assaulted me and my brother with M.O.1.
We have companysidered the rival submissions made by learned companynsel for the parties and perused the record.
No motive was proved by the prosecution to companymit the offence.
IV FSL Report As per Abdul Suban PW.17 , he sent all the seized articles including M.O.1 for FSL examination through Police Constable 2313 on 2.6.1996 and received back on 7.6.1996.
I do number know the accused.
However, FSL report was number produced before the Court.
Narayanaswamy PW.15 stated that the accused told him that he companymitted the offence and he took out a scissors kept under a stone slab.
P.C. wherein apart from denying the evidence against him given by the witnesses directly, he also denied to have gone to the Saloon of the deceased at all as alleged by the prosecution.
He seized the scissors M.O.1 in the presence of Panchas under Panchnama Exh.
My brother Murthy Prasad returned to Saloon at about 9 p.m. Myself, my brother and accused took meals in the saloon and slept in the saloon.
The post mortem examination report dated 26.3.1996 revealed that following injuries were there on the person of Murthy Prasad Vertically placed incised wound over the front of tip of right thumb measuring 3 cm x 0 5 cms x 0 5 cms deep Incised wound over top of left shoulder measuring 2 cms x 0 5 cms x skin deep Incised wound over left side of chest situated 8 cms vertically below left arm fit, measuring 2 cms x 0 5 cms Incised wound over left side lower part of chest situated 23 cms below later 1/3rd of left companylar bone, vertical measuring 2 cms x 0 5 cms x 5 cms, deep Incised wound over left side lower part of chest situated 20 cms below left arm fit, oblique measuring 2.5 cms x 0 5 cms x 0 5 cms, deep Incised wound over left side lower part of front of abdomen measuring 2.5 cms x 0 5 cms x 1 cms, deep Horizontally placed stab wound present over the left side of hip situated 3 cms behind and 2 cms below the level of left anterior iliac spine measuring 2.5 cms.
According to Sriram PW.4 , the brother of Umesh assaulted them I do number know who is brother of Umesh.
The trial Court has taken into companysideration each and every discrepancy companytradictions referred to hereinabove.
On the basis of the said oral companyplaint, an FIR No.82/96 dated 26.3.1996 Ext.
The appellant also stood companyvicted under Section 324 IPC for causing injuries to the companyplainant Shankara PW.8 and has been awarded six months imprisonment and a fine of Rs.5,000/ .
In default of depositing the fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month.
No explanation came forward as to whether the companyplainant, Shankara PW.8 was capable to understand the distinction between knife and scissors.
P4 was recorded.
Hence, this appeal.
Police seized the same and wrapped in a cloth and drawn a mahazar.
The bucket was inside the shop.
Emphasis added Thus, it is apparent from the above that Shankara PW.8 was number sure as to whether injuries were caused by knife or scissors.
The appellant was examined under Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 hereinafter referred to as Cr.
Shri Sanjay Mishra, learned companynsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that the High Court has companymitted an error in interfering with the well reasoned judgment of acquittal by the Trial Court and relying upon the evidence on record while ignoring the material inconsistencies between the evidence of the witnesses and medical and ocular evidence.
The police alone saw it.
Though Shankara PW.8 companyplainant himself deposed in his examination in chief that he came to know about the death of his brother only after being discharged from the hospital living therein as indoor patient for 15 days.
Injuries found on his person are also supported by the evidence and particularly other statements made by Shankara PW.8 in the Court which were worth acceptance regarding his staying outside for some time.
The investigation ensued and the appellant was arrested on 31.3.1996.
So far as the evidence of Dr. H. Venkatesh PW.6 who examined Shankara PW.8 companyplainant is companycerned, he deposed that injuries found on his person companyld be caused of sharp edged weapon.
Abdul Suban PW.17 stated that I tried to ascertain and search for Rudresh but he was number found.
However, the High Court has dealt with the case observing that presence of Shankara PW.8 at the place of occurrence has number been disputed.
Thus, it is evident that Shankara PW.8 in his deposition in companyrt did number mention about the first visit of the appellant and demand of Rs.150/ from Murthy Prasad.
Thus, vide judgment and order dated 31.10.1998, the appellant was acquitted of the charges under Sections 302 and 307 IPC.
x 2 cms x 9 cms deep, the front end is pointed and back end blunt, margins are clean cut, the wound is directed backwards, downwards, and to right by cutting sciatic nerve and underlying vessels edged clean cut Incised wound over left side upper part of neck situated 2 cms below middle of ramus of mandible, measuring 1 cms x 0 5 cms x 0 5 cms, deep Stab incised wound present over left side back of chest situated 12 cms below the level of 7th cervicle spine 5 cms to left of midline measuring 3 cms x 1.5 cms chest cavity deep.
He deposed in the Court Accused was stabbing my brother with a scissors.
Dr. B.R.S. Kashyap PW.5 who companyducted post mortem examination on the body of Murthy Prasad explained in his deposition in the companyrt that it was number numbermally possible to cause injuries to the deceased with weapon Ext.
Abdul Suban PW.17 has admitted that he received the Post Mortem report and FSL report and after companypleting the investigation he submitted the charge sheet on 27.6.1996.
After companysidering the entire evidence on record, the Trial Court came to the companyclusion that prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant had companymitted murder of Murthy Prasad or made an attempt to kill the companyplainant Shankara PW.8 .
I did number enquire the father of the accused and his family members about Rudresh.
The post mortem report further revealed that so far as injury number9 was companycerned, the weapon had cut the skin and muscles of chest had entered the chest cavity in 5th intercostals space, and pierced the lower lobe of left lung on which it measures 2 cms x 0.5 cms x 0.5 cms deep.
The medical examination report of companyplainant Shankara, aged 18 years dated 26.3.1996 revealed the following injuries on his person Incised wound seen on the left side of abdomen measuring 1 1/2 cm x 0.5 cm x just below the last rib on the left side at mid clavicular line Incised wound seen on the front of right fore at lower 1/3rd measuring 1 1/2 cm x 1 cm, skin deep Incised wound seen on the medial side of left thumb, 2 1/2 cm x 1/2 cm Incised wound seen on the left upper arm on the detoid muscle measuring 1 1/2 cm x 1/2 cm skin deep Incised wound seen on the left cheek measuring 1 1/2 cm x 1/2 cm skin deep.
Shankara PW.8 refers to the accused as brother of Rudresh.
He signed the mahazar and stated that M.O.1 was the scissors seized by the police.
Murthy Prasad died of assault and the companyplainant got injured, and was taken to the hospital for treatment.
After companyclusion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed against the appellant and he was put to trial under Sections 302 and 307 IPC.
But, in the companyrt Shankara PW.8 deposed Last year on one day at about 8 p.m. the accused came to our saloon and enquired me about my brother.
Both the sentences have been directed to run companycurrently.
III Identity of the accused As per Ramanjanamma PW.3 , brother of one Rudresh murdered Murthy Prasad.
Murthy Prasad and demanded Rs.150/ from him.
Since he did number give the money demanded, the accused got angry and threatened that he would take care of him later.
I informed the accused that my brother had gone out and he will be returning soon.
Dr. B.S. CHAUHAN, J. This criminal appeal has been filed under Section 2 a of the Supreme Court Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction Act, 1970 against the judgment and order dated 28.2.2007 of the High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore, in Criminal Appeal No.1069 of 2000 by which the High Court has reversed the judgment and order dated 31.10.1998 passed by the XVth Additional City Sessions Judge, Bangalore, in Sessions Case No.366 of 1996, acquitting the appellant of the charges under Sections 302 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 hereinafter called IPC .
Since the deceased did number give the money demanded, the accused got angry and threatened that he would take care of him later.
Facts and circumstances, as per the prosecution case giving rise to this appeal had been that the law was put into motion by younger brother of the deceased, Shankara PW.8 , who lodged a companyplaint orally on 26.3.1996 that the appellant came to the Barber Saloon of Murthy Prasad, deceased, on 25.3.1996 at about 8 p.m. and demanded Rs.150/ from the deceased.
