Case Note & Summary
These criminal appeals arose from the judgment of conviction and sentence dated December 11 and 12, 2017 in S.C. No.35/2015 passed by the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ramanagara. The accused were convicted for offences under Sections 120B, 506, 302 read with 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 25(1-B) of the Arms Act, 1959. The prosecution case was that on January 13, 2015, the deceased Nizam Pasha was assaulted by a group of persons near the KEB office in Ramanagara. His brother lodged a complaint stating that upon receiving information, he went to the spot, found the deceased with severe injuries, and on enquiry came to know that accused No.1 (Abdul Samad) and others had assaulted him. The injured was taken to hospital but succumbed. The police registered Crime No.10/2015 under Section 302 read with 34 IPC and after investigation filed a charge sheet. The trial court examined 31 prosecution witnesses and marked 35 exhibits and 16 material objects. The accused examined 4 documents. In the appeals, the accused-appellants raised several grounds: that the eyewitnesses were related and their evidence should be scrutinized cautiously; that the investigating officer failed to seize blood-stained clothes of those who shifted the injured, casting doubt on their presence; that the inquest mahazar did not mention the names of relatives present, indicating possible fabrication; and that the investigating officer did not guard the spot. The State opposed the appeals. The High Court, after hearing the parties, reserved judgment on April 25, 2024 and pronounced it on July 19, 2024. The full reasoning and outcome are not available in the provided excerpt.
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court erred in convicting the accused on the basis of related witnesses and alleged investigation lapses?
Case Details
2024 LawText (KAR) (07) 81
Criminal Appeal No. 277 of 2018 (C) c/w Criminal Appeal No. 372 of 2018 (C) and Criminal Appeal No. 1540 of 2018 (C)
Sreenivas Harish Kumar, S Rachaih
C H Hanumantharaya for Appellant No.1; Sandesh J Chouta, Senior Advocate for S Sunil Kumar for Appellant Nos.2 to 5; K Raghavendra for Appellant No.7; C Parameshwarappa for Appellant Nos.8 and 9; Naushad Pasha for Appellant in Crl.A 372/2018 and 1540/2018; Smt Sumathi, Special Public Prosecutor for State
Abdul Samad @ Samad, Irfan Khan @ Kadubu, Mubarak @ Batista, Syed Imtiyaz @ Kurupa, Abdul Wahid, Waseem Pasha, Shafi Ulla Khan, Thouhid Pasha, Waseem Akram @ Pillu (in Crl.A No.277/2018); Wasim Beg (in Crl.A No.372/2018); Waseem Pasha (in Crl.A No.1540/2018)
State of Karnataka by Ramanagara Town Police, Zakir Khan, Shamma Taj (in Crl.A No.277/2018); State by Ramanagara Town Police, Zakir Khan, Shamma Taj (in Crl.A No.372/2018); State by Ramanagara Town Police (in Crl.A No.1540/2018)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal appeal against conviction
Remedy Sought
Setting aside judgment of conviction and sentence, acquittal of the accused
Filing Reason
Conviction by trial court in SC No.35/2015
Previous Decisions
Trial court convicted accused under Sections 120B, 506, 302 r/w 149 IPC and Section 25(1-B) Arms Act, sentenced on 12-12-2017
Issues
Whether the evidence of related witnesses was credible and sufficiently corroborated?
Whether the failure to seize blood stained clothes of the rescuers created doubt about their presence?
Whether the omission of names in the inquest mahazar affected the prosecution case?
Whether the investigation lapses were fatal to the prosecution?
Submissions/Arguments
Related witnesses' evidence should be scrutinized cautiously
Non-seizure of blood stained clothes of those who shifted the injured creates doubt
Inquest mahazar did not contain names of relatives present, indicating possible fabrication
Investigating officer failed to secure the spot with police guard
Trial court overlooked these deficiencies
Judgment Excerpts
It is the case of the prosecution that the brother of Nizam Pasha lodged a complaint stating that he had received a message on 13.01.2015 around 3.45 p.m., that his brother was being assaulted by unknown persons near KEB office.
the investigating officer though stated to have visited the spot of occurrence and noticed that there were two to three long choppers and a bike lying at the spot, he did not depute any police to guard the place of occurrence till conducting spot mahazar
Procedural History
FIR registered as Crime No.10/2015 under Sections 302 r/w 34 IPC; charge sheet filed under Sections 120B, 506, 302 r/w 149 IPC and Section 25(1-B) Arms Act; trial in SC No.35/2015; conviction and sentence on 11-12-2017 and 12-12-2017; appeals filed under Section 374(2) CrPC; heard and reserved on 25-04-2024; judgment pronounced on 19-07-2024.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 120B, 506, 302, 149, 34
- Arms Act, 1959: 25(1-B)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 374(2)
