RAMAPPA HALAPA PUJAR AND ORS. versus STATE OF KARNATAKA

Citation: [2007] 5 S.C.R. 832 · Decided: 27-04-2007 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.B. SINHA · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
RAMAPPA HALAPA PUJARAND ORS. 
v. 
STATEOFKARNATAKA 
APRIL 27, 2007 
B 
[S.B. SINHA AND MARKANDEY KATJU, JJ.] 
Penal Code, I860; Ss. 143, I47, I48, 34I, 342 and 302 rlw S.149: 
Assault and murder-Accused persons assaulted deceased, her two 
C sons and another (PW 25) with deadly weapons-Injury also caused to 
accused No. I accidentally-In he injured condition the deceased was forcibly 
taken away and tied to an electric pole and her garments were taken off and 
accused continuously assaulted her till she breathed her last-Lodging of 
FIR by PW25-Charge-sheet-Trial Court acquitted all the accused persons-
D Reversed by High Court holding that there was no reason to disbelieve the 
evidence of relative witnesses and injured witnesses and convicted all the 
•• 
accused except A6 to A9 for committing offences under Sections 143, 147, 
+ 
I 48, 34 I, 342 and 302 rlw Section I 49 !PC and sentenced them accordingly--
On appeal, Held: Accused persons bearing ill-will against the deceased and 
her family in a land dispute matter-Deceased suffered a number of ante-
E mortem injuries almost on all part of her body-Trial Court appears to have 
totally relied upon the evidence of the Medical Officer that accused No. I was 
brought to hospital with a history of assaults but there were inconsistencies 
in the evidence of drivers of the tractor and the tempo in which accused no. 
I was taken from a Hospital and then shifted to another hospital-Prosecution 
F has explained about suffering of injuries by accused no. I, however, accused 
no. I could not offer any explanation as to how he sustained such injuries-
The manner in which the deceased met her death would show that she had 
been brutally assaulted by a large number of persons-Turning of some of 
the witnesses hostile by itself would not negate the case of prosecution-
However, turning of the villagers hostile in a case of this nature would 
G show that there was ring oj truth in the prosecution case-Since injuries 
sustained by PW25 was not in dispute, trial Court was not justified in 
disbelieving his evidence-Testimony of prosecution witnesses cannot be 
said to be wholly unreliable-Accused no. 1 did not tell any thing about the 
injury sustained by him to Investigating Officer, which clearly show 
H 
832 
RAMAPPA llALAPA PUJAR v. STATE OF KARNATAKA 
833 
JI--
; 
that accused no. 1 made all the attempts to conceal the circumstances under A 
which he had sustained injuries--Contradiction found in the deposition of 
the prosecution witnesses, minor in nature-Under such circumstances, High 
Court has believed the prosecution story-Hence, no infirmity is found in the 
impugned judgment-Testimony of relative and injured witnesses-Evidentiary 
value. 
B 
According to the prosecution, on the fateful day, the deceased and her 
two sons went to the field/property in dispute for plucking groundnuts. The 
accused persons in furtherance of their common object of assaulting them 
came to the field with deadly weapons. They also chased one 'D'-PW 25 and 
assaulted him. They assaulted the deceased with sticks causing bleeding c 
injuries. Allegedly in the scuffle that followed, accused no. 1 instigated 
accused no.4 to stab PW25 and when an attempt was made in this behalf, 
accidentally bleeding injuries were caused to accused no. 1. PW25 ran away, 
he was, however, caught in a nearby place. His hands were tied and was 
wrongfully confined in a house. It is also alleged that the accused persons 
D 
also threw stones at the deceased and her companions PWs.26 to 28. One of 
them had hit the deceased. PWs.25 to 28 being frightened, moved a little away 
from the scene leaving the deceased on the spot. She was forcibly taken near 
a Bus sand by t~e accused persons, they tied her to an electric pole and her 
garments were taken off. She was tied around her neck with her own saree. 
She was assaulted with sticks. She begged for water but the same was denied E 
to her. The accused continued to assault her with sticks till she breathed her 
last. The first informant, PW-25 who was allegedly kept confined in his house, 
after regaining consciousness when, he came to know of the murder, he 
lodged the First Information Report. The post-mortem examination of the 
deceased was conducted and charge sheet was filed by the police. Trial Court 
acquitted the accused persons on the ground that the prosecution case has F 
been supported only by the first informant, PW25, sister of the deceased and 
sons of

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.