Case Note & Summary
The High Court of Karnataka considered a criminal appeal under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) filed by the brother of a murder victim challenging the acquittal of eight accused by the Fast Track Court, Tumkur in S.C.No.228/2009. The prosecution case was that a political rivalry during the 2009 Lok Sabha elections led to a criminal conspiracy to murder one Ramesh because he supported the BJP instead of the Congress. On 28 April 2009, the accused, armed with swords, machetes and longs, arrived at Basavanamathikere in two auto-rickshaws and brutally attacked Ramesh and his brother Somashekara (PW10/complainant) while they were sitting in front of a shop. PW10 escaped but Ramesh was chased and severely assaulted on his head, hands and legs, resulting in his death at Victoria Hospital, Bengaluru at 12:20 p.m. The trial court, after examining 34 prosecution witnesses, several documents and material objects, and defence evidence, acquitted all accused on 7 April 2014. The appellant contended that the trial court ignored credible evidence, particularly the testimony of the eyewitness (PW10), the medical evidence of the doctor who first treated the deceased, and the recovery mahazars of weapons and vehicles. The appeal urged re-appreciation of the evidence and conviction of the accused. The High Court heard arguments of the appellant’s counsel and the counsel for the respondents. The judgment, as available, sets out the factual matrix and procedural history in detail but does not contain the final operative part or the court’s decision on the merits of the appeal.
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court's acquittal of the accused was justified despite the prosecution's evidence, including the testimony of an eyewitness (PW10) and recovery witnesses.
Case Details
2022 LawText (KAR) (02) 27
Criminal Appeal No. 778 of 2014
K. Somashekar, P.N. Desai
Sri. N. Dinesh Rao for appellant; Sri. Shankarappa S for Respondents No.1, 3 and 7; Sri. R. Srinivas for Respondents No.2, 4, 5 and 6; Smt. M. Gayathri for Respondent No.8; Smt. K.P. Yashodha, HCGP for Respondent No.9
1. Vasanthakumar S/o. Lorry Chennaiah, 2. Nagaraju @ Autoraju S/o. Bettaswamy, 3. Anil S/o. Krishnappa, 4. Raghu S/o. Ganganna, 5. Santhosh S/o. Rajanna, 6. Ravikumar @ Ravi @ Venkataramu S/o. Giriyappa, 7. Bhoja S/o. Srinivasaiah, 8. B.B. Padmaraju @ Papanna S/o. Bettaswamigowda, 9. State of Karnataka by Amruthur Police Station
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal appeal against acquittal filed by the victim/complainant (brother of the deceased) under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Remedy Sought
The appellant prayed to set aside the judgment of acquittal dated 7 April 2014 passed by the Fast Track Court, Tumkur in S.C.No.228/2009, and to convict the accused for the offences under Sections 120B, 143, 147, 148, 504, 506B, 302, 114 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Filing Reason
The trial court acquitted all eight accused despite the prosecution’s evidence, which the appellant contended was sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused. The acquittal was alleged to be a manifest error resulting in miscarriage of justice.
Previous Decisions
The trial court (Fast Track Court, Tumkur) in S.C.No.228/2009 acquitted all accused on 7 April 2014 for the charged offences.
Issues
Whether the trial court was justified in acquitting the accused despite the testimony of the eyewitness (PW10) and the corroborative evidence of the doctor, panch witnesses and recovery mahazars?
Submissions/Arguments
The appellant argued that the trial court committed a grave error by ignoring the credible and reliable evidence of PW10, the brother of the deceased and an eyewitness to the incident, whose complaint and testimony detailed the attack and identified all accused. The trial court also failed to properly appreciate the medical evidence of the doctor who first treated the injured at Kunigal Government Hospital, and the evidence of panch witnesses regarding seizure of weapons, clothes and the auto-rickshaws used in the crime. The appellant contended that the reasons assigned in the acquittal judgment were invalid and the acquittal led to substantial miscarriage of justice, necessitating re-appreciation of the entire evidence.
Judgment Excerpts
acquitting the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 143, 147, 148, 504, 506-B, 302, 114 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.
that the trial Court has committed grave error by not accepting his evidence in entirety.
Procedural History
On 28 April 2009, PW10 (Somashekara) filed a complaint regarding the murder of his brother Ramesh, leading to registration of FIR (Ex.P28) for offences under IPC. The investigation was conducted by PW33, who recorded statements, drew mahazars, collected medical and FSL reports, and seized material objects. A charge sheet was filed in C.C.No.588/2009 before the committal court, which committed the case to the Sessions Court under Section 209 CrPC, leading to S.C.No.228/2009. Charges were framed on 19 January 2010; the accused pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined 34 witnesses and marked Exs.P1 to P42 and MOs.1 to 15. After prosecution evidence, the accused were examined under Section 313 CrPC and they adduced defence evidence of DWs.1 to 3 and marked Exs.D1 to D4. The trial court, after hearing arguments, acquitted all accused on 7 April 2014. Aggrieved, the complainant (brother of the deceased) filed the present appeal under Section 372 CrPC before the High Court of Karnataka, which was heard on 8 February 2022.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 120B, 143, 147, 148, 504, 506B, 302, 114, 149
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 372, 207, 208, 209, 313, 233
