http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: STATE OF KARNATAKA

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: NARAYAN BABU SANADI AND ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       23/07/1998

BENCH: G.T. NANVATI, S.P. KURDUKAR

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                       J U D G M E N T      Nanavati, J.      The State  of Karnataka  has filed  this appeal against the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the High Court in Criminal  appeal No.  237/81. The  four  respondents  ere convicted by the trial court under Sections 326 and 450 both read with Section 34 IPC.      The prosecution  case was  that because  of the  family property dispute,  relations between  deceased  Nagappa  and deceased babu with the accused, who were all closely related to each  other, were  strained and that led to an assault by respondent Nos.  1-4 on  Nagappa when  he was working in the fields and which resulted in his immediate death and also on deceased Babu,  who was  taking rest  in his house and which also led  to his  death after about 10 days. The prosecution could not  lead any  direct evidence regarding the manner in which Nagappa  and Babu  were killed.  but the  trial  court relying upon  the statement  of deceased  Babu -  Ex. P.  42 convicted the respondents as stated above.      The High  Court on  reappreciation of the evidence came to the  conclusion that  the statement  of deceased  Babu  - Ex.P. 42  was not  all reliable . The High Court pointed out that the statement of Ex.P. 42 was stated to have been given in presence  of PWs  3 and  12. But PWs, 3 and 12 positively stated before  the court that no such statement was given by Babu. The  assault on  Nagappa had  taken place in the field which was  three furlongs  away from  Babu’s house  and  the assault on  Babu took  place while  he was  resting  in  his house; and  yet, in  Ex.P. 42  there was  a reference to the assault on Nagappa in the field. The High Court taking these factors into  consideration  came  to  the  conclusion  that deceased Babu  had not  given the statement Ex.P. 42 deposed by the Investigating officer.      There was  no other  evidence led  by  the  prosecution against the  respondents. The  high  Court  was,  therefore, right  in   acquitting  the   respondents.  The  appeal  is, therefore, dismissed.  bail bonds  of  the  respondents  are ordered to be cancelled.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2