LexVITHAL LAXMAN CHALAWADI & ETC. versus STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY P. PROSECUTOR
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B [2010] 12 S.C.R. 574 VITHAL LAXMAN CHALAWADI & ETC. V. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY P. PROSECUTOR (Criminal Appeal Nos. 69-70 of 2008) OCTOBER 19, 2010 [MARKANDEY KAT JU AND T.S. THAKUR, JJ.] Penal Code, 1860 - ss. 302134 and 323 - Murder and voluntanJy causing hurt - Altercation between two families - c Assault by accused persons resulting in death of deceased and injuries to mother and brother of deceased - Conviction of two accused u/ss. 323 and 324 - Acquittal of remaining four accused - High Court convicting accused nos. 1 to 4 u/ s. 302134 and acquitting the remaining two - On appeal, held: 0 Strained relationship between two families sufficiently established - Homicidal death of deceased - Testimony of injured eye-witnesses that accused no .. 1 responsible for inflicting injuries resulting in death of deceased - No overt ·act attributed to accused no. 3 except that he gave chappel E blow to mother of deceased - Thus, conviction and sentence uls. 302134 of accused no. 1 upheld whereas that of accused no. 3 set aside - Conviction of accused no. 3, uls. 323 upheld but sentence reduced to the period already undergone - Accused no. 2 acquitted of all charges on benefit of doubt - Evidence - Witnesses. F According to the prosecution case, 'R' was engaged to get married to 'P'-sister of accused nos. 1 to 4 but he instead married younger sister of 'P' without the consent of the accused persons. When the accused persons G questioned 'R' about the same, it resulted in an altercation between the twe> parties. It is alleged that accused 'VL' assaulted 'R' with a knife which resulted in his death. PW- 1, brother of 'R' and PW-6, mother of 'R' were also assaulted. Accused No. 3 gave a chapel blow to PW-6. H 574 VITHAL LAXMAN CHALAWADI & ETC. v. STATE OF 575 KARNATAKA REP. BY P. PROSECUTOR The trial court convicted two accused under Section 323 A and Section 324 IPC and acquitted the remaining four. In appeal, the High Court convicted accused Nos. 1 to 4 for the commission of offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced them to imprisonment for life. The remaining accused were s acquitted. Therefore, the appellants filed the instant appeals. Disposing of the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1 The relationship between the two families C was strained on account of the refusal of the deceased to marry 'P' and in preference tying the knot with the younger sister of the accused without their consent, which has been sufficiently established by the material on record. It was also not disputed either before the High 0 Court or even before this Court that deceased-'R' died a homicidal death having suffered as many as 17 injuries out of which two. were fatal. PW-16, doctor, noticed the injuries in the course of post-mortem examination. The prosecution relied upon the depositions of four eye- witnesses to the incident in support of its case. PW-1 and E PW-6 are the brother and the mother respectively of the deceased who were themselves injured in the incident. PW-7 and PW-8 reached the spot when they heard noise ,comi'ng out of the house of the deceased only to find accused nos. 1 to 4 assaulting the deceased with a knife. F A careful analysis of the depositions of the eye-witnesses leaves no manner of doubt, that 'N' who has since died was the first to assault the deceased with his knife. The version given by the injured eye-witnesses PW-1 and PW- 6 that appellant, 'VL' had then taken the knife from 'N' to G inflict injuries on the body of the deceased is credible and was rightly relied upon by the High Court. Therefore, there is no hesitation in holding that 'VL' was responsible for ... H 576 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 12 S.C.R. A inflicting injuries attributed to him by the eye-witnesses that resulted in the death of the deceased. Thus, the conviction and sentence imposed upon appellant 'VL' for the offence under Se.ction 302/34 IPC recorded by the High Court is upheld. [Para 7) [580-G-H] [581-A] B 1.2 As regards the role of appellant No. 3-'G' the evidence on record suggests that he gave a chappal blow to PW-6. There is no other overt act attributed to appellant No.3 to have joined the melee when tempers ran high. The allegation that he exhorted accused Nos. C 1 and 2 to kill the deceased was not satisfactorily proved to justify his conviction for murder with the help of Section 34 IPC. The nature of the evide
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.