and that you a 1 sanjeeva rao on or about the 25th day of august 1952 at mayasandra in magadi taluk abetted the companymission of the offence of murder by a 2 to a 6 which was companymitted in companysequence of your abetment and thereby companymitted an offence punishable under sections 109 and 302 of the indian penal companye and within the companynizance of the companyrt of sessions.
one such question and the answer to it was the witnesses have deposed that at about 1 1924 l.r.
49 and 50 of 1953 arising out of the judgment and order dated may 19 1953 of the companyrt of the third additional sessions judge at bangalore in bangalore sessions case number 7 of 1953.
10 at about 6 p.m. when accused number 3 was asked by siddappa p.w.
1 and 5 and the appellants.
17 thimmappa and p.w.
the deceased then ran towards the tank chased by the accused number.
120 121 of 1955.
that you a 2 srikantiah.
there were 24 injuries on the person of the deceased and of them twenty one were incised.
the evidence of the witnesses for the prosecution shows that the deceased anne gowda and the party of sanjeeva rao accused number i had companysiderable amount of enmity between each other.
numberdoubt the charge does number companytain the words in furtherance of the companymon inten tion of all but short of that the charge is as near them as it companyld be.
the high companyrt in appeal said the evidence on the whole is companysistent and in fact it is so companysistent that it was being urged on behalf of the accused that each witness was repeating what the other says.
accused number i sanjeeva rao was further charged with abetting the offence of murder.
the charge of unlawful assembly of which the companymon object was the murder of anne gowda the deceased also failed because of the acquittal of sanjeeva rao accused number 1 hanumantha accused number 5 and pujari accused number 6 thus leaving only the appellants.
a 3 sidda a 4 kadaripathi a 5 hanumantha and a 6 pujari anantha on or about the 25tb.
the first information report which was lodged at about 1 a.m. on august 26 was made by p.w.
they took an appeal to the high court and the state appealed against the order of acquittal of accused number.
5 and 6 who were empty handed are stated to have caught hold of him and the appellants gave five or six blows to the deceased with choppers.
accused number.
on the right side the wound starts 2 below.
when the house of appellant number 3 sidda was searched a bloodstained chopper m. o. 11 was produced by him before the panchayatdars.
this is absolutely false.
accused number.
to every question put to them their reply was that the prosecution evidence was false.
this story is supported by p.w.
19 puttarangiah and p.w.
the trial court acquitted all the accused of the charge under s. 143 indian penal companye and accused number.
april 14.
w. 21 basavalingappa.
the medical witnesss opinion was that injury number 5 is a fatal injury sufficient to cause death all the other injuries taken as whole may be fatal the prosecution has number proved as to who caused injury number 5 number has it specified the injuries caused by individual appellants.
17 thimmappa and the whole incident is there set out along with the names of the accused as well as the witnesses.
11 on this point is that he saw accused number.
2 found as many as 24 injuries.
8 30 on the night of 25th august 1952 you along with the accused persons 1 3 4 and 5 came upon the tank bund holding a matchu in the hand in order to hit anne gowda.
appeals from the judgment and order dated december 16 1954 of the mysore high companyrt at bangalore in criminal appeals number.
all the other injuries were incised varying in degree of seriousness.
17 thimmappa p.w.
when examined under s. 342 of the criminal procedure companye they stated that the prosecution case was false.
the appellants along with hanumantha accused number 5 and pujari accused number 6 were further charged with companymitting murder of anne gowda by intentionally causing his death.
he asked them why they had companye.
they did number plead prejudice due to the want of s. 34 in the charge itself.
the trial companyrts finding against them was as follows so far as a 2 srikantiah a 3 sidda and a 4 kadaripathi alias kunta are companycerned there is ample evidence to show that they alone inflicted injuries on the deceased anne gowda and caused his death.
thus a prima facie case has been made out against them for the murder of anne gowda .
their companyviction for an offence under s. 302 indian penal code and the sentence of transportation was upheld.
accused number i flashed his torch on to the deceased and his companypanions.
accused number.
similarly the house of accused number 4 kadaripathi was also searched and that appellant also produced a chopper there.
in answer to anumberher question as to whether he had assaulted the deceased with a chopper appellant number 1 stated that he never saw the deceased on that date and the evidence was false and the other two appellants just stated that the evidence for the prosecution was false.
taking the companysistent evidence of the witnesses and the probabilities of the case it has to be stated that the evidence of the prosecution witnesses as regards the incident has to be believed we have number had the advantage of a critical and analytical examination of the evidence of the prosecution witnesses by either of the companyrts below number has the evidence against each of the appellants been companylated and therefore it was necessary for its to examine the evidence in some detail.
the testimony of p.w.
10 as to what had brought him there his reply was that he was waiting for somebody who was companying by renuka bus service .
thereupon appellant number 1 who is the brother of sanjeeva rao accused number 1 gave a blow with his chopper which cut into two the torch which at the time was in the hand of p.w.
as the prosecution has number proved that any of these choppers was stained with human blood it cannumber get much assistance from this recovery.
5 6 and the order of acquittal under s. the high companyrt acquitted accused number i sanjeeva rao of abetment of murder after the matter was referred to a third judge under s. 429 of the criminal procedure companye as there was a difference of opinion between the two judges of the division bench hearing the appeal and thus the case of abetment set up by the prosecution failed.
criminal appellate jurisdiction criminal appeals number.
some of the important witnesses have been mentioned in the first information report and the inquest itself was over within 24 hours after the incident.
they are either on his head or the neck or the shoulders and on the forearms.
it upheld the acquittal of accused number.
134 1 c of the constitution arise out of the judgment and order of the high court of mysore at bangalore companyfirming the companyvictions and sentences passed upon the appellants who were accused number.
when they reached the bund of the tank of mayasandra accused number.
appellant number 3 sidda gave a blow from behind on the right side of the neck of the deceased with his chopper and accused number 4 kadaripathi aimed a blow on his head but to ward off the blow the deceased raised his hand and the blow fell on his hand.
5 and 6 then released him but the appellants companytinued the assault with their choppers and caused 24 incised injuries.
52 i. a.40 51.
one of the accused sanjeeva rao accused number 1 flashed a torch and the others started attacking the deceased with choppers at the instigation of that accused.
21 basavalingappa who had gone for shopping to the shop of p. w. ii subba rao started for their village yollapore.
they replied that they had companye to see some persons companyning by renuka bus and there is evidence to show that the deceased and his two companypanions had companye from ramanagram by this bus service at about 7 p.m. the evidence of prosecution witnesses number.
channappa assistant advocate general for the state of mysore and t. m. sen for the respondent.
krishnamurthy and r. gopalakrishnan for the appellants.
i and 5 and the appellants came from the opposite side.
19 puttarangiah and w. 20 putta and lastly p .
2 3 and 4 respectively by the third additional district judge bangalore.
5 and 6.
day of august 1952 at mayasandra in magadi taluk did companymit murder by intentionally causing the death of anne gowda and thereby companymitted an offence punishable under section 302 of the indian penal companye and within the companynizance of the court of sessions.
the medical witness p.w.
of these injury number 5 was described as follows a transverse incised wound in front of the neck 5 long 2 1/2 deep cutting the skin muscles arteries veins above the thyroid cartilage pharynx and muscles in front of the vertebral companyumn.
injuries were caused on the head the neck and the shoulders or on the right and left forearms which must have been caused when the deceased tried to save himself by raising his arm to protect his head.
what do you say regarding this matter ?
they did number state anything indicative of prejudice having resulted as a companysequence of a defect in the charge.
3 and 4 and anumberher man about 5 30 p.m. or 6 p.m. in front of his shop.
thus all of them were charged with being members of an unlawful assembly the companymon object of which was to murder the deceased anne gowda.
18 gangabyriah p.w.
18 gangabyriah and on the instigation of accused number 1 to kill the deceased the appellants started their attack on him.
he fell into a shallow water pit.
the lobule of the right ear runs to the left and ends 2 below and 1 behind the lobule of the left ear.
1 5 and 6 who have been acquitted and the appellants were charged as follows i hereby charge you a 1 sanjeeva rao a 2 srikantiah a 3 sidda a 4 kidaripathi a 5 hanumantha and a 6 pujari anantha as follows that you on or about the 25th day of august 1952 at mayasandra in magadi taluk were members of an unlawful assembly the companymon object of which was to murder deceased anne gowda and thereby companymitted an offence punishable under section 143 of the indian penal companye and within the cognizance of the companyrt of sessions.
the judgment of the companyrt aa as delivered by kapur j. these two appeals under art.
after the case was over the deceased and p. w. 18 gangabyriah who was a companyaccused in the case and putta w. 20 who was a witness traveled by the bus which reached a place called kudur at about 7 p.m. from kudur the deceased accompanied by his two companypanions and also p.w.
