State of Karnataka Vs. Sateesh & Others
|
Head Note
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Section 148 , Section 149 , Section 341 , Section 302
Murder - Acquittal Upheld - Appeal against acquittal - Findings by High Court that the conduct of PW15 police officer who reached the place of occurrence on receipt of telephonic information unexplainable in that he had chosen not to record the statements of two police constables who were present at the site and one of them was injured and also had chosen not to ask questions to injured S' - PW15 has not explained as to why he had not made any inquiry in the village itself - Registration of crime on the basis of a written FIR which was scribed by PW11 and brought to the Police Station by PW1 was not found to be bona fide -There was unexplained delay in registering the crime and it was extremely doubtful whether PW1 was an eye witness to the occurrence - In the original FIR, the name of PW2 was not mentioned at all, creating doubts regarding her presence - If PW13 had tried to cover her bleeding husband, her blood stained sari should have been produced on record - Her statement was also recorded two days after the incident, again creating a situation of doubt - Held that the reasons stated by the High Court while acquitting the respondent are quite possible from the evidence on record and the same upheld and appeal liable to be dismissed.
Topic(s)-Murder - Acquittal