Datasets:

AgamP

/

LLM_Dataset

like 0

{ "group": "Criminal" }

[ { "result": [ { "from_name": "label", "id": "d7a902fe9c23417499a7ef782f9fbdeb", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 116, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 0, "text": " IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,\n CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA\n\nDATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2013" } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "8d41599e98424d9480c25109556a7d14", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 678, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 116, "text": "\n\n BEFORE\n\nTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY\n\n CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.3532 OF 2012\n\nBETWEEN: R\n\nBabu S/o Siddappa, .. APPELLANT\nAge: 30 Years, Occ: Household,\nR/o: Sunthan Village,\nTaluk Chincholi,\nDistrict Gulbarga.\n\n(By Shri Ishwar Raj S.Chowdapur, Advocate)\n\nAND:\n\nThe State of Karnataka .. RESPONDENT\n(Through Ratkal Police Station)\nRepresented by Additional State\nPublic Prosecutor, Circuit Bench,\nGulbarga.\n\n(By Shri S.S.Aspalli, Government Pleader)\n\n " } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "e501424117da40a7935c2d9f2fb2fe38", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 964, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 678, "text": "This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 374(2) of the\nCode of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by the advocate for the\nappellant praying to set aside the order of conviction and\n\nsentence in S.C.No.232/2008 on the file of the II Additional\nSessions Judge, Gulbarga and acquit the appellant." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "4825806388fe43d39f73354b10b5b32d", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 1093, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 964, "text": "\n\n This appeal coming on for hearing this day, the court\ndelivered the following :-\n\n JUDGMENT" } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "d6893a25f82948f8be17fc9e876fb716", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 1180, "labels": [ "NONE" ], "start": 1093, "text": "\n Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and the learned Government Pleader." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "5ffc5502c95d45d7aae96937f128fdcb", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 1409, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 1188, "text": "2. The accused is in appeal in the following circumstances:- The appellant was accused of offences punishable under Sections 498A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Hereinafter referred to as the `IPC', for brevity)." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "afca23e571ad475d89a6fa226ca771bd", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 1510, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 1417, "text": "The complainant Sonabai was a resident of Hanumantwadi in Basavakalyan Taluk, Bidar District." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "7781f76712ed452dab7119e58f514065", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 1556, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 1511, "text": "She had two daughters, Laxmibai and Sangeeta." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "13ad25d88e1a4cf7b1a0f8e49561acb5", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 1620, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 1557, "text": "She had lost her husband about 12 years prior to the complaint." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "bdd429d80cb149b280248e4e26d3f86d", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 1713, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 1621, "text": "She had performed the marriage of her elder daughter Laxmi six years prior to the complaint." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "1ec1e1b5834845808d852df5b1880db4", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 1759, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 1714, "text": "Lakshmi was married to the present appellant." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "a5e8eb6283c94e09a44165b43f87c1c3", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 2065, "labels": [ "ARG_RESPONDENT" ], "start": 1760, "text": "It is claimed that the accused had looked after Lakshmi well till the birth of their first child, which was a girl and he was not happy with the girl child and thereafter started ill-treating Lakshmi, apart from which, he was also demanding dowry and on that pretext, he used to assault her continuously.\n" } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "ed8b1acb94c8470586e021c67ab456f0", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 2169, "labels": [ "ARG_RESPONDENT" ], "start": 2065, "text": "In this regard, it is the complainant's case that Laxmi had repeatedly told her about the ill-treatment." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "a9bd365a88ce4a7b8bd0d3c281ff66a9", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 2301, "labels": [ "ARG_RESPONDENT" ], "start": 2170, "text": "The complainant however had consoled her daughter and had assured her that she would advise the accused to take better care of her." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "2fb832bb62e4497eb7dc05e892c0c97c", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 2575, "labels": [ "ARG_RESPONDENT" ], "start": 2302, "text": "It is the complainant's further case that in this regard, she along with her son Ramakrishna and Goudappa Patil went to the house of accused at Suntan village and had advised the accused not to ill-treat Lakshmi by demanding money, as they could ill- afford any such dowry." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "b33ce164ed854b979830f07dee893d61", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 2760, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 2576, "text": "However, on 7.3.2008, she had received a message from Jaganath of Suntan village, that at about 10 p.m., her daughter Laxmi and grand-daughter Bhagewati had died of drowning in a well." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "a9de2636db5f45cbb62db1a2c4a1f811", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 2945, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 2761, "text": "The complainant, Ramakrishna and Goudappa Patil did rush to the Suntan village and saw the dead body of her daughter and grand-daughter and then lodged a complaint against the accused." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "647d015d71ca4ffb85de3753f17b9eca", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 3048, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 2946, "text": "Based on which, a case was registered on 8.3.2008 and a report was submitted to the Court of the JMFC." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "6dbcab60ba0a40f8a002ee985996f672", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 3236, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 3049, "text": "An inquest mahazar was conducted of the deceased and the bodies were sent for post-mortem and after taking further steps, a charge sheet was submitted against the accused as on 17.9.2008." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "961cc86c78694eac828af3346db7bd42", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 3495, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 3237, "text": "The case was committed to the sessions court for trial, which framed charges against the accused and the accused having pleaded not guilty and having claimed to be tried, the prosecution had examined 17 witness and marked 11 documents and 3 material objects." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "7b7b584c289b48ffbe6a9da3a636c937", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 3686, "labels": [ "RLC" ], "start": 3496, "text": "On conclusion of the trial and on examination of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the court below had framed the following points for consideration:- 1." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "46891ca4e9ec41cbada469eed82d85d2", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 3829, "labels": [ "RLC" ], "start": 3687, "text": "Whether the prosecution proves that accused has given ill-treatment to deceased Laxmi by demanding her to bring money from her parental house?" } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "4e1744e9b061445598ad1a7972bfc0d7", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 3991, "labels": [ "RLC" ], "start": 3829, "text": "\n 2. Whether the prosecution proves that accused has subjected deceased Laxmi to cruelty to such an extent that deceased Laxmi has committed suicide on 17.3.2008?" } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "3fcfda128d5e4e1fba0bfb61aeddbd61", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 4346, "labels": [ "RLC" ], "start": 3993, "text": "3. The court below answered the above points in the affirmative and accordingly had convicted the accused to undergo simple imprisonment for three years and pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offence punishable under section 498-A IPC and 10 years simple imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the IPC." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "0ce4febeac0f4a0a8be353297062d0f5", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 4405, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 4347, "text": "It is that which is under challenge in the present appeal." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "2f6b4f03a7034572b45c9f611b23fcdd", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 4536, "labels": [ "ARG_PETITIONER" ], "start": 4405, "text": "\n 4. learned Counsel for the appellant would submit that the case of the prosecution rests entirely on the evidence of PWs.8 to 11." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "4ffdbb09c0744ce6bb1dbf782a16787f", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 4657, "labels": [ "ARG_PETITIONER" ], "start": 4537, "text": "PW.8 is the mother of the deceased Laxmi, PW.9 is the brother, PW.10 is the sister and PW.11 is an elder of the village." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "112a90823c744622b0c2e37c75a07065", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 4939, "labels": [ "ARG_PETITIONER" ], "start": 4658, "text": "It is their consistent evidence that Laxmi was constantly complaining about the appellant ill-treating her complaining that she had produced a female child when he wanted a male child and further that she had not fetched enough dowry and therefore she should bring some more money." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "c15851b2d28342cdb3979e60542267f4", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 5334, "labels": [ "ARG_PETITIONER" ], "start": 4940, "text": "It is further reiterated that the complainant along with her son and Goudappa Patil had advised him to take better care of Laxmi and that they were all aware of the continuous harassment meted out to Laxmi, which had instigated her to take the extreme step of committing suicide along with her daughter and therefore, the offences punishable under sections 498A and 306 of the IPC are made out." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "46d1f5d99179495ba12c2234d7cd6c6a", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 5546, "labels": [ "ARG_PETITIONER" ], "start": 5335, "text": "The learned Counsel would point out that PWs.1 to 6, who were the witnesses belonging to the village of the appellant, namely Suntan village, had all turned hostile and not supported the case of the prosecution." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "d05e0394c1f84cc59b364ea9594a9123", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 6018, "labels": [ "ARG_PETITIONER" ], "start": 5547, "text": "They were the best persons, according to the prosecution, who had made statements of the appellant being seen ill-treating Laxmi and since that was the sheet anchor of the prosecution case and in the face of those witnesses having been treated as hostile witnesses, they had apparently been compelled to furnish such statements by the hands of the Police and this, therefore explains the circumstance that all of them, without exception, have turned hostile at the trial." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "2ad5021f021e43f3b3b438241f9d3168", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 6137, "labels": [ "ARG_PETITIONER" ], "start": 6019, "text": "The only evidence on which the prosecution and the court below however placed reliance is on the evidence PWs.8 to 11." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "9e0bd37a4da247cca01cb97996990959", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 6318, "labels": [ "ARG_PETITIONER" ], "start": 6138, "text": "First of all, those witnesses did not have any direct knowledge nor is it their case that they have seen the appellant ill-treating the deceased or instigate her to commit suicide." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "8497c263a06b4a098b74f066bc7ea65b", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 6402, "labels": [ "ARG_PETITIONER" ], "start": 6319, "text": "It is their own case that Laxmi had on and off informed them of such ill-treatment." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "df2c3e1bf93645089af1b2dfb8fbd8d4", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 6647, "labels": [ "ARG_PETITIONER" ], "start": 6403, "text": "Therefore, in the absence of any direct evidence of ill-treatment or instigation by the appellant, it cannot be said that the prosecution has made out any case insofar as offences punishable under Sections 498A and 306 of the IPC are concerned." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "539b4bc93d0744b68c6ef6e6c3323d22", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 7095, "labels": [ "ARG_PETITIONER" ], "start": 6647, "text": "\n In this regard, the learned Counsel for the appellant places reliance on a decision of the Supreme Court in S.S.Chheena vs. Vijay Kumar Mahajan and another, 2010(4) Crimes 101 and would submit that even if the evidence of PWs.8 to 11, is taken on its face value, it cannot be treated as direct evidence, which could establish the charges under the sections aforesaid and hence pleads that the judgment be set aside and the appellant be acquitted." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "8c55d5a411c14dcfb4b31239a4d06980", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 7102, "labels": [ "ARG_RESPONDENT" ], "start": 7095, "text": "\n 5. le" } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "d2179bef6bdc43ebb8099dc69ffb542e", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 7411, "labels": [ "ARG_RESPONDENT" ], "start": 7103, "text": "the learned Government Pleader would seek to justify the judgment of the court below and would point out that it is the consistent evidence of PWs.8 to 11 that there was constant ill-treatment, soon after the birth of Bhagewati, by the appellant to the deceased Laxmi, which has driven her to commit suicide." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "b679c873ca9448f58d278fc3c88746fa", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 7505, "labels": [ "ARG_RESPONDENT" ], "start": 7412, "text": "The constant taunting and harassment would certainly amount to instigation to commit suicide." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "89a4b0d7cfa94399b0e4fd2c2ebed29d", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 7658, "labels": [ "ARG_RESPONDENT" ], "start": 7506, "text": "As has been laid down in a catena of decisions, the ill-treatment by the husband within the four walls of the house would hardly be witnessed by others." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "c357290ed1ff4b12bc695063706ffd69", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 7887, "labels": [ "ARG_RESPONDENT" ], "start": 7659, "text": "The unfortunate circumstance that PWs.1 to 6, who did make statements in the first instance of they having seen the ill-treatment meted out to the deceased, having turned hostile, does not negate the evidence of other witnesses." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "1b30e949954448649216d8232a28a4c9", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 8030, "labels": [ "ARG_RESPONDENT" ], "start": 7887, "text": "\nThe fact of ill-treatment is narrated first hand by the deceased time and again to the complainant and others, as consistently stated by them." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "b0d4dc35478e4f8387ff2c7ef8a68eb1", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 8371, "labels": [ "ARG_RESPONDENT" ], "start": 8031, "text": "Therefore, the cruelty is writ large in the circumstances of the case, as has been demonstrated by the extreme step taken by the deceased not only to kill herself, but also to put an end to the life of her daughter Bhagewati, as apparently, the deceased did not want her daughter also to go through the very ordeal that she had experienced." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "ef5f42aab3a04d6493658fd296000b4b", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 8402, "labels": [ "ARG_RESPONDENT" ], "start": 8372, "text": "That was the clinching factor." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "dce2740597af414585720c62584e3a86", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 8869, "labels": [ "ARG_RESPONDENT" ], "start": 8403, "text": "It is only the near and dear ones of the victim, who would have knowledge of the details of ill- treatment and harassment and the independent witness, PW.11 having also been a well-wisher of the family, who had constantly kept in view the welfare of the family and also having declared that he had visited the appellant after he had constantly ill-treated Laxmi, to advise him to take better care of her, in the presence of the mother of the deceased and her brother" } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "fa33bdca35d64a238e967781e99583ad", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 8892, "labels": [ "ARG_RESPONDENT" ], "start": 8869, "text": ", cannot be overlooked." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "22a3bf6751184bf08f2e7ac1bfc8bad7", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 8999, "labels": [ "ARG_RESPONDENT" ], "start": 8893, "text": "He was not in any way related to the complainant or her family and he had no ill-will against the accused." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "92c11c20823a439eb41860bbf1ceb50d", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 9079, "labels": [ "ARG_RESPONDENT" ], "start": 9000, "text": "He was an elder of the village and has withstood the test of cross-examination." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "6a293a2c4fd8466c9f92042f8572e864", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 9530, "labels": [ "ARG_RESPONDENT" ], "start": 9080, "text": "Therefore, the court below having placed reliance on the testimony of PWs.8 to 11 is not to be faulted and the death of Laxmi within six years from her marriage, would raise a presumption against the husband in terms of the law and the facts in the present case on hand would clearly indicate that there was constant harassment and instigation, which had driven Laxmi to commit suicide, who has also taken her daughter with her in committing suicide." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "546ab730dfd0474192e27281c909723a", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 9752, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 9530, "text": "\n 6. Given the rival contentions, as pointed out by the learned Counsel for the appellant, in order to bring home the charge of an offence punishable under Section 498A IPC, it is necessary to prove that there was cruelty." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "c1ffd1c70a6547858fa7a4559390a36d", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 10129, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 9753, "text": "There was nothing on record to indicate that the family of Laxmi was incapable of providing any dowry, given the fact that her father was no more and that they were not well of and the marriage having taken place six years prior to the incident, the demand for dowry coming at a late stage, would not raise any presumption of such demand in the absence of any direct evidence." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "ceb702adb4c04821a146d025c6b372dc", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 10224, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 10130, "text": "It is only to bring the case within the scope of Section 498A that such an allegation is made." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "ba72e5d3834d4af5b87228ca7af56d1d", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 10441, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 10225, "text": "Therefore, to hold that the prosecution had established its case beyond all reasonable doubt insofar as the offence punishable under section 498A cannot be presumed merely on the basis of the evidence of PWs.8 to 11." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "7b4389afecdd41e6be712375b89222c6", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 10735, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 10442, "text": "Insofar as the offence punishable under section 306 of the IPC, is concerned, again would require the prosecution to establish the circumstance that there was instigation by the appellant on Lakshmi to commit suicide and that he had intentionally driven her and his daughter to commit suicide." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "b0f29b479fbd43e08d8143aff97fc957", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 11049, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 10735, "text": "\n The apex court, in the decision cited by the learned Counsel for the appellant, in S.S.Chheena vs. Vijaya Kumar Mahajan and another, 2010 (4) Crimes 101, has discussed and reviewed the case law in this regard, with reference to the following authorities :- Mahendra Singh vs. State of M.P., 1995 Supp (3) SCC 731" } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "89fc5018c6104600b2800d118235eca0", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 11132, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 11050, "text": "In this case, the allegations levelled against the accused were as follows: \" I..." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "2cc574713c6e46d6adf9e63581d0e5da", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 11225, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 11133, "text": "My mother-in-law and husband and sister-in-law (husband's elder brother's wife) harassed me." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "5f101ddbda014273a41fddcdcaa3f9cd", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 11275, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 11226, "text": "My husband Mahendra wants to marry a second time." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "4ae39a5280a44118b31b408950fd6faa", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 11325, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 11276, "text": "He has illicit connections with my sister-in-law." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "758043621b364e25b205dea095be108b", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 11398, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 11326, "text": "Because of these reasons and being harassed, I want to die by burning\"\n " } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "18797056bd3e4437a2487b041743766a", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 11528, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 11398, "text": "The court concluded that by no stretch of imagination, the ingredients of abetment are attracted on the statement of the deceased." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "bf3b814fce2648679e6bd09f64474296", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 11679, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 11530, "text": "In Ramesh Kumar vs. State of Chhattisgarh, (2001)9 SCC 618, a three-judge bench of the apex court had occasion to deal with a case of similar nature." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "c958a052d2304b649564e92e9804b1fc", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 11815, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 11680, "text": "In an argument between a husband and wife, the husband had stated that \"you are free to do whatever you wish and go wherever you like\"." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "6d240ccf717b44a38f3a4928c7e2c711", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 11871, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 11815, "text": "\nThereafter, the wife is said to have committed suicide." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "47125c0fd5894033ba455065b04b2c43", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 12074, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 11872, "text": "The apex court, in that circumstance, examined the different shades of the meaning of \"instigation\" as hereunder:- \"20. Instigation is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do `an act'." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "07db2cf9e6e44ac391b5682700042aba", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 12289, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 12075, "text": "To satisfy the requirement of instigation though it is not necessary that actual words must be used to that effect or what constitutes instigation must necessarily and specifically be suggestive of the consequence." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "0da7dc5c418d43d58d5fd8b576133ed4", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 12378, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 12290, "text": "Yet a reasonable certainty to incite the consequence must be capable of being spelt out." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "e250a1bb286d4b53ab5be397fb8837e7", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 12658, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 12378, "text": "\n The present one is not a case where the accused had by his acts or omission or by a continued course of conduct created such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide in which case an instigation may have been inferred." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "f4d797367b2e420a92003ad6891205d7", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 12793, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 12659, "text": "A word uttered in the fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation.\"" } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "33928b08c79541fa850d06a27566d5b9", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 13150, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 12795, "text": "In State of West Bengal vs. Orilal Jaiswal, (1994)1 SCC 73, the apex court has expressed that the court should be extremely careful in assessing the facts and circumstances of each case and the evidence adduced in the trial court for the purpose of finding whether cruelty meted out to the victim had in fact induced her to end life by committing suicide." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "5662a680e73b49029c5e9c0622e34eb0", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 13655, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 13151, "text": "If it appears to the court that a victim committing suicide was hyper sensitive to ordinary petulance, discord and differences in domestic life quite common to the society to which the victim belonged and such petulance, discord and differences were not expected to induce a similarly circumstanced individual in a given society to commit suicide, the conscience of the court should not be satisfied for basing a finding that the accused charged of abetting the offence of suicide should be found guilty." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "bcc64a6e18884a088e80735ff8bd92dc", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 13785, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 13655, "text": "\n In Chitresh Kumar Chopra vs. State, (2009) 16 SCC 605, the court dealt with the meaning of the word \"instigation\"\nand \"goading\"." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "9108b7498f1b42148018dce1f5cb1377", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 13904, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 13786, "text": "The court has opined that there should be intention to provoke, incite or encourage the doing of an act by the latter." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "e385718730974961b358a6b02fcc7240", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 13969, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 13905, "text": "Each person's suicidability pattern is different from the other." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "86d5215bb22b4d7abb66d4c1afe42309", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 14031, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 13970, "text": "Each person has his own idea of self-esteem and self-respect." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "8584c12afdb143fe942fdd816bdb8e9f", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 14124, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 14032, "text": "Therefore, it is impossible to lay down any straitjacket formula in dealing with such cases." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "78af365b86054df79258dfaea328cd80", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 14201, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 14125, "text": "Each case has to be decided on the basis of its own facts and circumstances." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "9a53ec65bcb543da97470d0d098feae8", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 14314, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 14201, "text": "\nAbetment involves a mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a thing." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "a9b8f6d5134d47f0947b95bbb5ece58c", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 14439, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 14315, "text": "Without a positive act on the part of the accused to instigate or aid in committing suicide, conviction cannot be sustained." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "549c8ba52170444fa8b8c6f6a0175f2b", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 14871, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 14440, "text": "The intention of the legislature and the ratio of the cases decided by the apex court were clear that in order to convict a person under section 306 of the IPC, there has to be a clear mens rea to commit the offence and it also requires an active act or direct act which lead the deceased to commit suicide seeing no option and that act must have been intended to push the deceased into such a position that he committed suicide.\n " } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "15f1431d7f754c09a3a31505c55aa900", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 15522, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 14871, "text": "The above being the settled legal position insofar as abetment of suicide is concerned, in the absence of any direct evidence of the appellant having driven the deceased to commit suicide, the possibility of the deceased having been hyper sensitive to the alleged demand of the appellant, that he wanted a male child and having regard to the aspect that the latent or patent suicidal tendencies of an individual are not to be placed in a straitjacket formula, the actual state of mind of Laxmi in having committed suicide, cannot be attributed to any instigation or abetment by the appellant in her having committed suicide, along with her only child." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "6ed019dc7cb542049037c646e6df0780", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 15691, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 15523, "text": "It is also possible that sheer frustration of not having borne a male child, which the appellant is alleged to have desired, may have also driven her to commit suicide." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "e32ddb20bff04e5aaab8026b05b5c757", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 15841, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 15692, "text": "Even if it was her case that she was being harassed and ill-treated, there was no such allegation of harassment and ill-treatment of the young child." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "e23f8272e90747f9ac6cf44e870f7305", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 16031, "labels": [ "RATIO" ], "start": 15842, "text": "In that view of the matter, it cannot be concluded with any certainty that there was constant cruelty meted out to Lakshmi and that there was abetment of the commission of suicide by Laxmi." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "16bfb0be792a45b8a4d1260719ab3002", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 16156, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 16032, "text": "In that view of the matter, the finding of the court below based entirely on the evidence of PW.8 to 11 cannot be sustained." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "0a87e344b8be4986a61e2a9edd0fb971", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 16195, "labels": [ "RPC" ], "start": 16156, "text": "\n In the result, the appeal is allowed." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "375bebe6234540bf92865406f84bece0", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 16241, "labels": [ "RPC" ], "start": 16196, "text": "The judgment of the court below is set aside." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "70cb6f740b1746259612a99bc2df8062", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 16269, "labels": [ "RPC" ], "start": 16242, "text": "The appellant is acquitted." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "9cdcf8bd45584c7097d1444920690609", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 16335, "labels": [ "RPC" ], "start": 16270, "text": "The fine amount, if any, paid by the appellant shall be refunded." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "9d3cd3d2675b4f78a936b4b3256b8862", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 16524, "labels": [ "RPC" ], "start": 16335, "text": "\n The office is directed to communicate this order to the jail authorities of the Central Jail, Gulbarga, to set the appellant at liberty as he has been in custody for the past three years." } }, { "from_name": "label", "id": "cc1d3ae6bc2b4493a1c876e1eee87d66", "to_name": "text", "type": "labels", "value": { "end": 16539, "labels": [ "NONE" ], "start": 16524, "text": "\n Sd/- JUDGE nv" } } ] } ]

{ "text": " IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,\n CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA\n\nDATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2013\n\n BEFORE\n\nTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY\n\n CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.3532 OF 2012\n\nBETWEEN: R\n\nBabu S/o Siddappa, .. APPELLANT\nAge: 30 Years, Occ: Household,\nR/o: Sunthan Village,\nTaluk Chincholi,\nDistrict Gulbarga.\n\n(By Shri Ishwar Raj S.Chowdapur, Advocate)\n\nAND:\n\nThe State of Karnataka .. RESPONDENT\n(Through Ratkal Police Station)\nRepresented by Additional State\nPublic Prosecutor, Circuit Bench,\nGulbarga.\n\n(By Shri S.S.Aspalli, Government Pleader)\n\n This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 374(2) of the\nCode of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by the advocate for the\nappellant praying to set aside the order of conviction and\n\nsentence in S.C.No.232/2008 on the file of the II Additional\nSessions Judge, Gulbarga and acquit the appellant.\n\n This appeal coming on for hearing this day, the court\ndelivered the following :-\n\n JUDGMENT\n Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and the learned Government Pleader.\n 2. The accused is in appeal in the following circumstances:- The appellant was accused of offences punishable under Sections 498A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Hereinafter referred to as the `IPC', for brevity).\n The complainant Sonabai was a resident of Hanumantwadi in Basavakalyan Taluk, Bidar District. She had two daughters, Laxmibai and Sangeeta. She had lost her husband about 12 years prior to the complaint. She had performed the marriage of her elder daughter Laxmi six years prior to the complaint. Lakshmi was married to the present appellant. It is claimed that the accused had looked after Lakshmi well till the birth of their first child, which was a girl and he was not happy with the girl child and thereafter started ill-treating Lakshmi, apart from which, he was also demanding dowry and on that pretext, he used to assault her continuously.\nIn this regard, it is the complainant's case that Laxmi had repeatedly told her about the ill-treatment. The complainant however had consoled her daughter and had assured her that she would advise the accused to take better care of her. It is the complainant's further case that in this regard, she along with her son Ramakrishna and Goudappa Patil went to the house of accused at Suntan village and had advised the accused not to ill-treat Lakshmi by demanding money, as they could ill- afford any such dowry. However, on 7.3.2008, she had received a message from Jaganath of Suntan village, that at about 10 p.m., her daughter Laxmi and grand-daughter Bhagewati had died of drowning in a well. The complainant, Ramakrishna and Goudappa Patil did rush to the Suntan village and saw the dead body of her daughter and grand-daughter and then lodged a complaint against the accused. Based on which, a case was registered on 8.3.2008 and a report was submitted to the Court of the JMFC. An inquest mahazar was conducted of the deceased and the bodies were sent for post-mortem and after taking further steps, a charge sheet was submitted against the accused as on 17.9.2008. The case was committed to the sessions court for trial, which framed charges against the accused and the accused having pleaded not guilty and having claimed to be tried, the prosecution had examined 17 witness and marked 11 documents and 3 material objects. On conclusion of the trial and on examination of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the court below had framed the following points for consideration:- 1. Whether the prosecution proves that accused has given ill-treatment to deceased Laxmi by demanding her to bring money from her parental house?\n 2. Whether the prosecution proves that accused has subjected deceased Laxmi to cruelty to such an extent that deceased Laxmi has committed suicide on 17.3.2008?\n 3. The court below answered the above points in the affirmative and accordingly had convicted the accused to undergo simple imprisonment for three years and pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offence punishable under section 498-A IPC and 10 years simple imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the IPC. It is that which is under challenge in the present appeal.\n 4. learned Counsel for the appellant would submit that the case of the prosecution rests entirely on the evidence of PWs.8 to 11. PW.8 is the mother of the deceased Laxmi, PW.9 is the brother, PW.10 is the sister and PW.11 is an elder of the village. It is their consistent evidence that Laxmi was constantly complaining about the appellant ill-treating her complaining that she had produced a female child when he wanted a male child and further that she had not fetched enough dowry and therefore she should bring some more money. It is further reiterated that the complainant along with her son and Goudappa Patil had advised him to take better care of Laxmi and that they were all aware of the continuous harassment meted out to Laxmi, which had instigated her to take the extreme step of committing suicide along with her daughter and therefore, the offences punishable under sections 498A and 306 of the IPC are made out. The learned Counsel would point out that PWs.1 to 6, who were the witnesses belonging to the village of the appellant, namely Suntan village, had all turned hostile and not supported the case of the prosecution. They were the best persons, according to the prosecution, who had made statements of the appellant being seen ill-treating Laxmi and since that was the sheet anchor of the prosecution case and in the face of those witnesses having been treated as hostile witnesses, they had apparently been compelled to furnish such statements by the hands of the Police and this, therefore explains the circumstance that all of them, without exception, have turned hostile at the trial. The only evidence on which the prosecution and the court below however placed reliance is on the evidence PWs.8 to 11. First of all, those witnesses did not have any direct knowledge nor is it their case that they have seen the appellant ill-treating the deceased or instigate her to commit suicide. It is their own case that Laxmi had on and off informed them of such ill-treatment. Therefore, in the absence of any direct evidence of ill-treatment or instigation by the appellant, it cannot be said that the prosecution has made out any case insofar as offences punishable under Sections 498A and 306 of the IPC are concerned.\n In this regard, the learned Counsel for the appellant places reliance on a decision of the Supreme Court in S.S.Chheena vs. Vijay Kumar Mahajan and another, 2010(4) Crimes 101 and would submit that even if the evidence of PWs.8 to 11, is taken on its face value, it cannot be treated as direct evidence, which could establish the charges under the sections aforesaid and hence pleads that the judgment be set aside and the appellant be acquitted.\n 5. le the learned Government Pleader would seek to justify the judgment of the court below and would point out that it is the consistent evidence of PWs.8 to 11 that there was constant ill-treatment, soon after the birth of Bhagewati, by the appellant to the deceased Laxmi, which has driven her to commit suicide. The constant taunting and harassment would certainly amount to instigation to commit suicide. As has been laid down in a catena of decisions, the ill-treatment by the husband within the four walls of the house would hardly be witnessed by others. The unfortunate circumstance that PWs.1 to 6, who did make statements in the first instance of they having seen the ill-treatment meted out to the deceased, having turned hostile, does not negate the evidence of other witnesses.\nThe fact of ill-treatment is narrated first hand by the deceased time and again to the complainant and others, as consistently stated by them. Therefore, the cruelty is writ large in the circumstances of the case, as has been demonstrated by the extreme step taken by the deceased not only to kill herself, but also to put an end to the life of her daughter Bhagewati, as apparently, the deceased did not want her daughter also to go through the very ordeal that she had experienced. That was the clinching factor. It is only the near and dear ones of the victim, who would have knowledge of the details of ill- treatment and harassment and the independent witness, PW.11 having also been a well-wisher of the family, who had constantly kept in view the welfare of the family and also having declared that he had visited the appellant after he had constantly ill-treated Laxmi, to advise him to take better care of her, in the presence of the mother of the deceased and her brother, cannot be overlooked. He was not in any way related to the complainant or her family and he had no ill-will against the accused. He was an elder of the village and has withstood the test of cross-examination. Therefore, the court below having placed reliance on the testimony of PWs.8 to 11 is not to be faulted and the death of Laxmi within six years from her marriage, would raise a presumption against the husband in terms of the law and the facts in the present case on hand would clearly indicate that there was constant harassment and instigation, which had driven Laxmi to commit suicide, who has also taken her daughter with her in committing suicide.\n 6. Given the rival contentions, as pointed out by the learned Counsel for the appellant, in order to bring home the charge of an offence punishable under Section 498A IPC, it is necessary to prove that there was cruelty. There was nothing on record to indicate that the family of Laxmi was incapable of providing any dowry, given the fact that her father was no more and that they were not well of and the marriage having taken place six years prior to the incident, the demand for dowry coming at a late stage, would not raise any presumption of such demand in the absence of any direct evidence. It is only to bring the case within the scope of Section 498A that such an allegation is made. Therefore, to hold that the prosecution had established its case beyond all reasonable doubt insofar as the offence punishable under section 498A cannot be presumed merely on the basis of the evidence of PWs.8 to 11. Insofar as the offence punishable under section 306 of the IPC, is concerned, again would require the prosecution to establish the circumstance that there was instigation by the appellant on Lakshmi to commit suicide and that he had intentionally driven her and his daughter to commit suicide.\n The apex court, in the decision cited by the learned Counsel for the appellant, in S.S.Chheena vs. Vijaya Kumar Mahajan and another, 2010 (4) Crimes 101, has discussed and reviewed the case law in this regard, with reference to the following authorities :- Mahendra Singh vs. State of M.P., 1995 Supp (3) SCC 731 In this case, the allegations levelled against the accused were as follows: \" I... My mother-in-law and husband and sister-in-law (husband's elder brother's wife) harassed me. My husband Mahendra wants to marry a second time. He has illicit connections with my sister-in-law. Because of these reasons and being harassed, I want to die by burning\"\n The court concluded that by no stretch of imagination, the ingredients of abetment are attracted on the statement of the deceased.\n In Ramesh Kumar vs. State of Chhattisgarh, (2001)9 SCC 618, a three-judge bench of the apex court had occasion to deal with a case of similar nature. In an argument between a husband and wife, the husband had stated that \"you are free to do whatever you wish and go wherever you like\".\nThereafter, the wife is said to have committed suicide. The apex court, in that circumstance, examined the different shades of the meaning of \"instigation\" as hereunder:- \"20. Instigation is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do `an act'. To satisfy the requirement of instigation though it is not necessary that actual words must be used to that effect or what constitutes instigation must necessarily and specifically be suggestive of the consequence. Yet a reasonable certainty to incite the consequence must be capable of being spelt out.\n The present one is not a case where the accused had by his acts or omission or by a continued course of conduct created such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide in which case an instigation may have been inferred. A word uttered in the fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation.\"\n In State of West Bengal vs. Orilal Jaiswal, (1994)1 SCC 73, the apex court has expressed that the court should be extremely careful in assessing the facts and circumstances of each case and the evidence adduced in the trial court for the purpose of finding whether cruelty meted out to the victim had in fact induced her to end life by committing suicide. If it appears to the court that a victim committing suicide was hyper sensitive to ordinary petulance, discord and differences in domestic life quite common to the society to which the victim belonged and such petulance, discord and differences were not expected to induce a similarly circumstanced individual in a given society to commit suicide, the conscience of the court should not be satisfied for basing a finding that the accused charged of abetting the offence of suicide should be found guilty.\n In Chitresh Kumar Chopra vs. State, (2009) 16 SCC 605, the court dealt with the meaning of the word \"instigation\"\nand \"goading\". The court has opined that there should be intention to provoke, incite or encourage the doing of an act by the latter. Each person's suicidability pattern is different from the other. Each person has his own idea of self-esteem and self-respect. Therefore, it is impossible to lay down any straitjacket formula in dealing with such cases. Each case has to be decided on the basis of its own facts and circumstances.\nAbetment involves a mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a thing. Without a positive act on the part of the accused to instigate or aid in committing suicide, conviction cannot be sustained. The intention of the legislature and the ratio of the cases decided by the apex court were clear that in order to convict a person under section 306 of the IPC, there has to be a clear mens rea to commit the offence and it also requires an active act or direct act which lead the deceased to commit suicide seeing no option and that act must have been intended to push the deceased into such a position that he committed suicide.\n The above being the settled legal position insofar as abetment of suicide is concerned, in the absence of any direct evidence of the appellant having driven the deceased to commit suicide, the possibility of the deceased having been hyper sensitive to the alleged demand of the appellant, that he wanted a male child and having regard to the aspect that the latent or patent suicidal tendencies of an individual are not to be placed in a straitjacket formula, the actual state of mind of Laxmi in having committed suicide, cannot be attributed to any instigation or abetment by the appellant in her having committed suicide, along with her only child. It is also possible that sheer frustration of not having borne a male child, which the appellant is alleged to have desired, may have also driven her to commit suicide. Even if it was her case that she was being harassed and ill-treated, there was no such allegation of harassment and ill-treatment of the young child. In that view of the matter, it cannot be concluded with any certainty that there was constant cruelty meted out to Lakshmi and that there was abetment of the commission of suicide by Laxmi. In that view of the matter, the finding of the court below based entirely on the evidence of PW.8 to 11 cannot be sustained.\n In the result, the appeal is allowed. The judgment of the court below is set aside. The appellant is acquitted. The fine amount, if any, paid by the appellant shall be refunded.\n The office is directed to communicate this order to the jail authorities of the Central Jail, Gulbarga, to set the appellant at liberty as he has been in custody for the past three years.\n Sd/- JUDGE nv " }

{ "group": "Tax" }

[ { "result": [ { "from_name": null, "id": "ac4523a0252e4007986cefbd6d5f571a", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 921, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 52, "text": "1/11\n\nIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU\n\n DATED THIS THE 06TH DAY OF JULY 2018\n\n PRESENT\n\n THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI\n\n AND\n\n THE HON'BLE Mrs.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA\n\n I.T.A.No.415/2017\n\nBETWEEN:\n\n1. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7\n C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD\n BANGALORE-560001.\n\n2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX\n CIRCLE-5(1)(1), BANGALORE.\n ...APPELLANTS\n\n(By Mr. E.I. SANMATHI, ADV.)\n\nAND:\n\nM/S. TESCO HINDUSTAN CENTRE PVT. LTD\nNo.81 & 82, EPIP AREA RESEARCH CENTRE-2\nWHITEFIELD, BANGALORE-560095\nPAN: AABCT8915B.\n\n ...RESPONDENT\n(RESPONDETN SERVED & UNREPRESENTED)\n\n " } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "596624a30df2412884e470f71c1f0854", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 1489, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 921, "text": "THIS I.T.A IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME\nTAX ACT 1961, PRAYING TO DECIDE THE FOREGOING\nQUESTION OF LAW AND/OR SUCH OTHER QUESTIONS OF LAW\nAS MAY BE FORMULATED BY THE HON'BLE COURT AS\nDEEMED FIT AND SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED\n25-01-2017 PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE\nTRIBUNAL, `B' BENCH, BANGALORE, IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS\n\n Vs. M/s. Tesco Hindustan Centre Pvt. Ltd\n\n 2/11\n\nNo.IT(TP)A No.569/Bang/2015 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11\nANNEXURE-A" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "998e1b72078f42cdb71205556967f29d", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 1531, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 1490, "text": "AS SOUGHT FOR IN THIS APPEAL AND TO GRANT" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "6852a7950c364e7585eda7b5a6a7d07d", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 1582, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 1531, "text": "\nSUCH OTHER RELIEF AS DEEMED FIT IN THE INTEREST OF" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "4aa103d0a15b40a5b7a69c9e1fa5b684", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 1590, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 1582, "text": "\nJUSTICE" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "93b9ec3c4f3e4e4a9b9d70b460114574", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 1645, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 1590, "text": ".\n\n THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "df54fd6da27540c59c173068207b7e6e", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 1685, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 1645, "text": "\nS. SUJATHA J. DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "cf545be157d04bd4bd44aeaa1d90d68c", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 1727, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 1685, "text": "\n\n JUDGMENT" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "0b70bcd3dcd648be882c42a7cc0220e1", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 1776, "labels": [ "NONE" ], "start": 1727, "text": "\nMr. E.I.Sanmathi Adv. for Appellants- Revenue 1." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "86afcb0e5534456ba0e093cd47653005", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 2140, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 1777, "text": "The Appellants-Revenue have filed this appeal u/s.260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, raising purportedly certain substantial questions of law arising from the order of the ITAT, Bangalore Bench `B', Bangalore, dated 25.01.2017 passed in IT(TP)A No.191/Bang/2015 (Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s.Tesco Hindustan Service Centre Pvt. Ltd.,) for A.Y.2010-11.\n 2." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "1c8069db49634e85a6de03cc3ffa73f1", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 2749, "labels": [ "ISSUE" ], "start": 2141, "text": "The proposed substantial questions of law framed in the Memorandum of appeal by the Appellants-Revenue are quoted below for ready reference:- Vs. M/s. Tesco Hindustan Centre Pvt. Ltd 3/11 \" 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that certain comparable cannot be taken as comparables on the basis of facts of a different case for different assessee without making any specific FAR analysis vis-a-vis he assessee company in contrast to the fact that Tata Elxsi Limited satisfy all the qualitative and quantitative filters applied by the TPO?\n 2." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "bf37f28146fe4fdfa1978fd2d21762a0", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 3078, "labels": [ "ISSUE" ], "start": 2750, "text": "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in directing the TPO to apply RPT filter of 15% by superimposing the decisions of the Tribunal in other cases without going into specific facts of the taxpayer and without adducing the basis for arriving at the 15% cut off for RPT filters?" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "1c333ae90d2b475a89729e126bccf6d0", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 3445, "labels": [ "ISSUE" ], "start": 3080, "text": "3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in rejecting few companies chosen by Transfer Pricing Officer as comparables on the basis of functional dissimilarity by following its earlier order which has not reached finality even when the same satisfied qualitative and quantitative tests in the case of the assessee?\"." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "6d467a72ab2f4f89b32fa2f08326ce34", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 3455, "labels": [ "NONE" ], "start": 3445, "text": "\n Vs. M/s." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "a4c05684ba26472bb72ccf5a51360718", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 3471, "labels": [ "NONE" ], "start": 3456, "text": "Tesco Hindustan" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "9bbbb2de12f04d2ca075cf3b1aef774a", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 3478, "labels": [ "NONE" ], "start": 3472, "text": "Centre" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "274ab59590c648798c4bf437c8bfe570", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 3487, "labels": [ "NONE" ], "start": 3479, "text": "Pvt. Ltd" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "5b7ce4b2a6cc4b748024de5beb248a5a", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 3495, "labels": [ "NONE" ], "start": 3488, "text": "4/11 3." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "72b67542b90540a796c231ee2106a0d2", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 3623, "labels": [ "ARG_PETITIONER" ], "start": 3496, "text": "Learned counsel for the Appellants-Revenue Mr.E.I.Sanmathi submits that he does not press the substantial question of law No.1." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "4c06c1204da74322b6cd5d27e00c2b1c", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 3651, "labels": [ "NONE" ], "start": 3624, "text": "His submission is recorded." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "c486cd087d5d41c5981803b980a74897", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 4035, "labels": [ "RLC" ], "start": 3653, "text": "` 4. Regarding substantial question of law Nos.2 and 3 The learned Tribunal, after discussing the rival contentions of both the Appellants-Revenue and the Respondent-assessee, has given the following findings against Revenue with regard to various issues raised before it with regard to `Transfer Pricing' and `Transfer Pricing Adjustments' made by the concerned authorities below." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "051a031b8f7e4a459e3ee6485eb8408d", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 4149, "labels": [ "RLC" ], "start": 4036, "text": "We consider it appropriate to quote the relevant portion of the order of Tribunal, which runs as hereunder:- \"12." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "dc2b294dbc9a406ca16553aa353a2045", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 4234, "labels": [ "RLC" ], "start": 4150, "text": "We have considered the rival submissions as well as the relevant material on record." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "b990e08e2d554da0b63b6db3f73757c0", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 4286, "labels": [ "RLC" ], "start": 4235, "text": "We find that the co-ordinate bench of this Vs. M/s." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "db76580d4ef34a9693e23de3cfc5a6ba", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 4302, "labels": [ "RLC" ], "start": 4287, "text": "Tesco Hindustan" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "8920d124a69f45a7b0714800811914e2", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 4309, "labels": [ "RLC" ], "start": 4303, "text": "Centre" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "e955fdd35f4a4120b4879724e2b25eb0", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 4318, "labels": [ "RLC" ], "start": 4310, "text": "Pvt. Ltd" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "86251e38cecf40db98b779268d190844", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 4595, "labels": [ "RLC" ], "start": 4319, "text": "5/11 Tribunal in assessee's own case for the Assessment Year 2006-07 vide order dt.18-10- 2016 in IT(TP)A No.1633/Bang/2012 has considered the comparability of these four companies and rejected these companies by considering the RPT at 15% as well as functional comparability." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "d23389ca15664f05bf2b9ba32ba95ec7", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 4926, "labels": [ "RLC" ], "start": 4596, "text": "We find that the DRP has given the details of RPT of all the 10 companies at page 11 and therefore the following three companies will be excluded as not satisfying the tolerance range of 15% RPT filter.\n (i) Fortune Infotech Ltd. RPT 25% (ii) Icra Online Ltd. RPT 19.61% (iii) Sundaram Business Services Ltd.\n RPT 29.44% 13." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "7d6de05ce21d41c28dace14696a018a9", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 5162, "labels": [ "RLC" ], "start": 4927, "text": "As regards Accentia Technologies Ltd. and ICRA Online Ltd. this Tribunal in the assessee's own case for the Assessment Year 2008-09 has excluded these two companies from the set of comparables in para 5 as under: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "9a65ebadf18f4b10b5eeb73dfed02f86", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 5254, "labels": [ "RLC" ], "start": 5163, "text": "We further note that the functional comparability has been examined in detailed by Vs. M/s." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "80ea4df932794dce8b987b1b3421852b", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 5270, "labels": [ "RLC" ], "start": 5255, "text": "Tesco Hindustan" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "c4405d14403a4a2e90f3f8183fb252a9", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 5277, "labels": [ "RLC" ], "start": 5271, "text": "Centre" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "42f596dc685c4460a935dd58cb11b6ca", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 5286, "labels": [ "RLC" ], "start": 5278, "text": "Pvt. Ltd" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "e68193916f0b498e8c07498c8b670311", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 5521, "labels": [ "RLC" ], "start": 5287, "text": "6/11 the co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal in the case of Equant Solutions India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT in IT(TP)A No.1202/Del/2015 as well as in the case of ITO Vs. Interwoven Software Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.461/Bang/2015." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "450aa14d72574a52906320a37899fad8", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 5828, "labels": [ "RLC" ], "start": 5522, "text": "Further in the case of Acropetal Technologies Ltd. (Seg.) the co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal in the case of Kodiak Networks (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT in IT(TP)A No.1540/Bang/2012 has considered the functional comparability and found that this company is not comparable with a captive service provider." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "b04b44e348324efeb89c9de3ca96a535", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 5928, "labels": [ "RLC" ], "start": 5829, "text": "Accordingly we direct the Assessing Officer/TPO to exclude these companies from set of comparables." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "a9fc38beb8904d30928204219c1245b4", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 5959, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 5928, "text": "\n E-clerx Services Limited 14.1" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "3576e76d73644b17be6a913c4eb23bd3", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 6021, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 5960, "text": "We have considered the rival submissions and relevant record." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "99967f1b09724d01894faaddad571989", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 6263, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 6022, "text": "At the out set, we note that the comparability of M/s Eclerx Services Ltd. has been examined by the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Maersk Global Centres (India) (P) Ltd (supra) in para 82 83 as under: 82. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 83." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "f54ca12e04c444788c70c2185ef0959d", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 6361, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 6264, "text": "For the reasons given above, we are of the view that if the functions actually performed Vs. M/s." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "dc67679b37d64c3188875877e1c97075", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 6377, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 6362, "text": "Tesco Hindustan" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "e48eac86046b41779aa58c8752243bcc", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 6384, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 6378, "text": "Centre" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "d4a53b2628154a0583cc9ae830e1cbdc", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 6434, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 6385, "text": "Pvt. Ltd 7/11 by the assessee company for its AEs" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "8a2c16380c3c40c999e9b71068a67f54", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 6760, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 6435, "text": "are compared with the functional profile of M/s eClerx Services Pvt. Ltd. and Mold-Tech Technologies Ltd., it is difficult to find out any relatively equal degree of comparability and the said entities cannot be taken as comparables for the purpose of determining ALP of the transactions of the assessee company with its AEs." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "1a2dfb951e984bc98c6ffe310a572d93", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 6912, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 6761, "text": "We, therefore, direct that these two entities be excluded from the list of 10 comparables finally taken by the AO/TPO as per the direction of the DRP?." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "9a95f2d934bd471e9a99ffb99b3d9d26", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 7015, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 6914, "text": "15.4 We have heard the rival submissions and perused and carefully considered the material on record." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "bbc9af4d89ec4ef2b296b100d7b60813", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 7356, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 7016, "text": "We find that the assessee has brought on record sufficient evidence to establish that this company is functionally dis- similar and different from the assessee and hence is not comparable and the finding rendered in the case of Trilogy E-Business Software India Pvt. Ltd. (supra) for Assessment Year 2007-08 is applicable to this year also." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "ecfd3b4eead14554acf4ba6f78615edd", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 7544, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 7357, "text": "We are inclined to concur with the argument put forth by the assessee that Infosys BPO Ltd. is not functionally comparable since it has the benefit of market value as well as brand value." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "edcd81e511244a6981233e3ba497f045", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 7561, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 7545, "text": "This company Vs." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "015373fbddd24da192a0cfaa55b1806c", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 7655, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 7562, "text": "M/s. Tesco Hindustan Centre Pvt. Ltd 8/11 enjoys the benefits of scale and market leadership." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "f7fe5a7b81d941d9b4e2e366461057aa", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 7767, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 7656, "text": "In this view of the matter, we hold that this company ought to be omitted from the set of comparable companies." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "059a428fc589446caf58e852abc8228b", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 7794, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 7768, "text": "It is ordered accordingly." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "38c7ab4aacbf4668993692c3643678f5", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 7977, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 7794, "text": "\nSince we have directed the A.O/TPO to exclude these companies from the set of comparables therefore the TPO is directed to compute the ALP on the basis of remaining comparables\".\n 5." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "b8d2066fa24e44e68a7efc79e75bd4bd", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 8415, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 7978, "text": "This Court in ITA No.536/2015 C/w ITA No.537/2015 delivered on 25.06.2018 (Prl. Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. Vs.\n M/s. Softbrands India Pvt. Ltd.,) has held that in these type of cases, unless an ex-facie perversity in the findings of the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is established by the appellant, the appeal at the instance of an assessee or the Revenue under Section 260-A of the Act is not maintainable." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "100e59373b4445f8b1c377857aadd85c", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 8559, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 8415, "text": "\n The relevant portion of the said judgment is quoted below for ready reference: \" Conclusion: Vs. M/s. Tesco Hindustan Centre Pvt. Ltd 9/11 55." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "fa6b667cdcb54100a1646f4adf5b941f", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 8690, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 8560, "text": "A substantial quantum of international trade and transactions depends upon the fair and quick judicial dispensation in such cases." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "cb60e499f13a4d019ff46b4de1b06249", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 9321, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 8691, "text": "Had it been a case of substantial question of interpretation of provisions of Double Taxation Avoidance Treaties (DTAA), interpretation of provisions of the Income Tax Act or Overriding Effect of the Treaties over the Domestic Legislations or the questions like Treaty Shopping, Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS), Transfer of Shares in Tax Havens (like in the case of Vodafone etc.), if based on relevant facts, such substantial questions of law could be raised before the High Court under Section 260-A of the Act, the Courts could have embarked upon such exercise of framing and answering such substantial question of law." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "680a8180baa946cab64cfa5430fbe50f", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 9609, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 9322, "text": "On the other hand, the appeals of the present tenor as to whether the comparables have been rightly picked up or not, Filters for arriving at the correct list of comparables have been rightly applied or not, do not in our considered opinion, give rise to any substantial question of law." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "c88f8adcae754e5d85bde4060c2d7ae7", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 9754, "labels": [ "RATIO" ], "start": 9609, "text": "\n 56. We are therefore of the considered opinion that the present appeals filed by the Revenue do not give rise to any substantial Vs. M/s. Tesco" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "dbd095e7f3624010bcc77f52d83ec77a", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 9764, "labels": [ "RATIO" ], "start": 9755, "text": "Hindustan" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "cb9bded183314dd69e7edd090155fe1d", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 9771, "labels": [ "RATIO" ], "start": 9765, "text": "Centre" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "6b6a78fed1c04ed8b314e635857f7291", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 9780, "labels": [ "RATIO" ], "start": 9772, "text": "Pvt. Ltd" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "cb1a268fbd59453bab2aa0f8b48b5854", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 10021, "labels": [ "RATIO" ], "start": 9781, "text": "10/11 question of law and the suggested substantial questions of law do not meet the requirements of Section 260-A of the Act and thus the appeals filed by the Revenue are found to be devoid of merit and the same are liable to be dismissed." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "9ce78e6b41004288b1bc54b8db9d18ca", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 10452, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 10021, "text": "\n 57. We make it clear that the same yardsticks and parameters will have to be applied, even if such appeals are filed by the Assessees, because, there may be cases where the Tribunal giving its own reasons and findings has found certain comparables to be good comparables to arrive at an `Arm's Length Price' in the case of the assessees with which the assessees may not be satisfied and have filed such appeals before this Court." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "0485bf9b45804ac891bbfe8403e025cb", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 10649, "labels": [ "RATIO" ], "start": 10453, "text": "Therefore we clarify that mere dissatisfaction with the findings of facts arrived at by the learned Tribunal is not at all a sufficient reason to invoke Section 260-A of the Act before this Court." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "3f406252f4584310a244422ee697429f", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 10739, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 10649, "text": "\n 58. The appeals filed by the Revenue are therefore dismissed with no order as to costs.\"" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "493e0f4389694fceb1e1313d2b8711bc", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 10942, "labels": [ "RPC" ], "start": 10739, "text": "\n 6. Having heard the learned counsels for the parties, we are therefore of the opinion that no substantial question of law arises in the present case Vs. M/s. Tesco Hindustan Centre Pvt. Ltd 11/11 also." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "cd511e125a934834a9d1ca57049533b9", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 11044, "labels": [ "RPC" ], "start": 10943, "text": "The appeal filed by the Appellants-Revenue is liable to be dismissed and it is dismissed accordingly." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "6d0164465c8145ff862de7a107041560", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 11054, "labels": [ "RPC" ], "start": 11044, "text": "\nNo costs." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "5526fa6cf3e441c18e9b3323467e7e06", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 11124, "labels": [ "NONE" ], "start": 11054, "text": "\n Copy of this judgment be sent to the Respondent- Assessee forthwith." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "9c9715584e064a2ebebec38cfed838b1", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 11152, "labels": [ "NONE" ], "start": 11124, "text": "\n Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE Srl." } } ] } ]

{ "text": " 1/11\n\nIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU\n\n DATED THIS THE 06TH DAY OF JULY 2018\n\n PRESENT\n\n THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI\n\n AND\n\n THE HON'BLE Mrs.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA\n\n I.T.A.No.415/2017\n\nBETWEEN:\n\n1. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7\n C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD\n BANGALORE-560001.\n\n2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX\n CIRCLE-5(1)(1), BANGALORE.\n ...APPELLANTS\n\n(By Mr. E.I. SANMATHI, ADV.)\n\nAND:\n\nM/S. TESCO HINDUSTAN CENTRE PVT. LTD\nNo.81 & 82, EPIP AREA RESEARCH CENTRE-2\nWHITEFIELD, BANGALORE-560095\nPAN: AABCT8915B.\n\n ...RESPONDENT\n(RESPONDETN SERVED & UNREPRESENTED)\n\n THIS I.T.A IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME\nTAX ACT 1961, PRAYING TO DECIDE THE FOREGOING\nQUESTION OF LAW AND/OR SUCH OTHER QUESTIONS OF LAW\nAS MAY BE FORMULATED BY THE HON'BLE COURT AS\nDEEMED FIT AND SET ASIDE THE APPELLATE ORDER DATED\n25-01-2017 PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE\nTRIBUNAL, `B' BENCH, BANGALORE, IN APPEAL PROCEEDINGS\n\n Vs. M/s. Tesco Hindustan Centre Pvt. Ltd\n\n 2/11\n\nNo.IT(TP)A No.569/Bang/2015 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11\nANNEXURE-A AS SOUGHT FOR IN THIS APPEAL AND TO GRANT\nSUCH OTHER RELIEF AS DEEMED FIT IN THE INTEREST OF\nJUSTICE.\n\n THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY\nS. SUJATHA J. DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-\n\n JUDGMENT\nMr. E.I.Sanmathi Adv. for Appellants- Revenue 1. The Appellants-Revenue have filed this appeal u/s.260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, raising purportedly certain substantial questions of law arising from the order of the ITAT, Bangalore Bench `B', Bangalore, dated 25.01.2017 passed in IT(TP)A No.191/Bang/2015 (Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s.Tesco Hindustan Service Centre Pvt. Ltd.,) for A.Y.2010-11.\n 2. The proposed substantial questions of law framed in the Memorandum of appeal by the Appellants-Revenue are quoted below for ready reference:- Vs. M/s. Tesco Hindustan Centre Pvt. Ltd 3/11 \" 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that certain comparable cannot be taken as comparables on the basis of facts of a different case for different assessee without making any specific FAR analysis vis-a-vis he assessee company in contrast to the fact that Tata Elxsi Limited satisfy all the qualitative and quantitative filters applied by the TPO?\n 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in directing the TPO to apply RPT filter of 15% by superimposing the decisions of the Tribunal in other cases without going into specific facts of the taxpayer and without adducing the basis for arriving at the 15% cut off for RPT filters?\n 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in rejecting few companies chosen by Transfer Pricing Officer as comparables on the basis of functional dissimilarity by following its earlier order which has not reached finality even when the same satisfied qualitative and quantitative tests in the case of the assessee?\".\n Vs. M/s. Tesco Hindustan Centre Pvt. Ltd 4/11 3. Learned counsel for the Appellants-Revenue Mr.E.I.Sanmathi submits that he does not press the substantial question of law No.1. His submission is recorded.\n ` 4. Regarding substantial question of law Nos.2 and 3 The learned Tribunal, after discussing the rival contentions of both the Appellants-Revenue and the Respondent-assessee, has given the following findings against Revenue with regard to various issues raised before it with regard to `Transfer Pricing' and `Transfer Pricing Adjustments' made by the concerned authorities below. We consider it appropriate to quote the relevant portion of the order of Tribunal, which runs as hereunder:- \"12. We have considered the rival submissions as well as the relevant material on record. We find that the co-ordinate bench of this Vs. M/s. Tesco Hindustan Centre Pvt. Ltd 5/11 Tribunal in assessee's own case for the Assessment Year 2006-07 vide order dt.18-10- 2016 in IT(TP)A No.1633/Bang/2012 has considered the comparability of these four companies and rejected these companies by considering the RPT at 15% as well as functional comparability. We find that the DRP has given the details of RPT of all the 10 companies at page 11 and therefore the following three companies will be excluded as not satisfying the tolerance range of 15% RPT filter.\n (i) Fortune Infotech Ltd. RPT 25% (ii) Icra Online Ltd. RPT 19.61% (iii) Sundaram Business Services Ltd.\n RPT 29.44% 13. As regards Accentia Technologies Ltd. and ICRA Online Ltd. this Tribunal in the assessee's own case for the Assessment Year 2008-09 has excluded these two companies from the set of comparables in para 5 as under: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx We further note that the functional comparability has been examined in detailed by Vs. M/s. Tesco Hindustan Centre Pvt. Ltd 6/11 the co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal in the case of Equant Solutions India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT in IT(TP)A No.1202/Del/2015 as well as in the case of ITO Vs. Interwoven Software Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.461/Bang/2015. Further in the case of Acropetal Technologies Ltd. (Seg.) the co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal in the case of Kodiak Networks (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT in IT(TP)A No.1540/Bang/2012 has considered the functional comparability and found that this company is not comparable with a captive service provider. Accordingly we direct the Assessing Officer/TPO to exclude these companies from set of comparables.\n E-clerx Services Limited 14.1 We have considered the rival submissions and relevant record. At the out set, we note that the comparability of M/s Eclerx Services Ltd. has been examined by the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Maersk Global Centres (India) (P) Ltd (supra) in para 82 83 as under: 82. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 83. For the reasons given above, we are of the view that if the functions actually performed Vs. M/s. Tesco Hindustan Centre Pvt. Ltd 7/11 by the assessee company for its AEs are compared with the functional profile of M/s eClerx Services Pvt. Ltd. and Mold-Tech Technologies Ltd., it is difficult to find out any relatively equal degree of comparability and the said entities cannot be taken as comparables for the purpose of determining ALP of the transactions of the assessee company with its AEs. We, therefore, direct that these two entities be excluded from the list of 10 comparables finally taken by the AO/TPO as per the direction of the DRP?.\n 15.4 We have heard the rival submissions and perused and carefully considered the material on record. We find that the assessee has brought on record sufficient evidence to establish that this company is functionally dis- similar and different from the assessee and hence is not comparable and the finding rendered in the case of Trilogy E-Business Software India Pvt. Ltd. (supra) for Assessment Year 2007-08 is applicable to this year also. We are inclined to concur with the argument put forth by the assessee that Infosys BPO Ltd. is not functionally comparable since it has the benefit of market value as well as brand value. This company Vs. M/s. Tesco Hindustan Centre Pvt. Ltd 8/11 enjoys the benefits of scale and market leadership. In this view of the matter, we hold that this company ought to be omitted from the set of comparable companies. It is ordered accordingly.\nSince we have directed the A.O/TPO to exclude these companies from the set of comparables therefore the TPO is directed to compute the ALP on the basis of remaining comparables\".\n 5. This Court in ITA No.536/2015 C/w ITA No.537/2015 delivered on 25.06.2018 (Prl. Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. Vs.\n M/s. Softbrands India Pvt. Ltd.,) has held that in these type of cases, unless an ex-facie perversity in the findings of the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is established by the appellant, the appeal at the instance of an assessee or the Revenue under Section 260-A of the Act is not maintainable.\n The relevant portion of the said judgment is quoted below for ready reference: \" Conclusion: Vs. M/s. Tesco Hindustan Centre Pvt. Ltd 9/11 55. A substantial quantum of international trade and transactions depends upon the fair and quick judicial dispensation in such cases. Had it been a case of substantial question of interpretation of provisions of Double Taxation Avoidance Treaties (DTAA), interpretation of provisions of the Income Tax Act or Overriding Effect of the Treaties over the Domestic Legislations or the questions like Treaty Shopping, Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS), Transfer of Shares in Tax Havens (like in the case of Vodafone etc.), if based on relevant facts, such substantial questions of law could be raised before the High Court under Section 260-A of the Act, the Courts could have embarked upon such exercise of framing and answering such substantial question of law. On the other hand, the appeals of the present tenor as to whether the comparables have been rightly picked up or not, Filters for arriving at the correct list of comparables have been rightly applied or not, do not in our considered opinion, give rise to any substantial question of law.\n 56. We are therefore of the considered opinion that the present appeals filed by the Revenue do not give rise to any substantial Vs. M/s. Tesco Hindustan Centre Pvt. Ltd 10/11 question of law and the suggested substantial questions of law do not meet the requirements of Section 260-A of the Act and thus the appeals filed by the Revenue are found to be devoid of merit and the same are liable to be dismissed.\n 57. We make it clear that the same yardsticks and parameters will have to be applied, even if such appeals are filed by the Assessees, because, there may be cases where the Tribunal giving its own reasons and findings has found certain comparables to be good comparables to arrive at an `Arm's Length Price' in the case of the assessees with which the assessees may not be satisfied and have filed such appeals before this Court. Therefore we clarify that mere dissatisfaction with the findings of facts arrived at by the learned Tribunal is not at all a sufficient reason to invoke Section 260-A of the Act before this Court.\n 58. The appeals filed by the Revenue are therefore dismissed with no order as to costs.\"\n 6. Having heard the learned counsels for the parties, we are therefore of the opinion that no substantial question of law arises in the present case Vs. M/s. Tesco Hindustan Centre Pvt. Ltd 11/11 also. The appeal filed by the Appellants-Revenue is liable to be dismissed and it is dismissed accordingly.\nNo costs.\n Copy of this judgment be sent to the Respondent- Assessee forthwith.\n Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE Srl.\n" }

{ "group": "Criminal" }

[ { "result": [ { "from_name": null, "id": "43499bd62ea94624b2f38f4cbc677913", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 39, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 0, "text": " IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "99c177100db44a95aa43696e9a7c9117", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 140, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 40, "text": " \n\n CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD\n\n DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY 2013" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "00b596e20e95492091f3b6265c5cd116", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 269, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 140, "text": "\n PRESENT\n\nTHE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K. BHAKTHAVATSALA\n\n AND" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "10e07161246d4f029ea953788ef6ecea", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 710, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 269, "text": "\nTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.SREENIVASE GOWDA\n\n CRIMINAL R C No.11/2009\n C/W\n\nCRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.2516/2009 C/W 2535/2009\n\n C/W 2536/2009\n\nBETWEEN\n\n CRL. R.C. NO.11/2009\n\nHigh Court of Karnataka, Petitioner\nRep. By Additional Registrar General,\nHigh Court Circuit Bench,\nDharwad.\n\n(By Sri V M Banakar, Addl. SPP, for petitioner)\n\nAND" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "fef568a97a084f2a9f5b224c3432e79d", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 1117, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 710, "text": "\n\n1. Sri Sundresh,\nS/o Basavanneppa Udikeri,\nAge: 22 years.\n\n2. Sri Siddappa Chandranaik\nRevannavar,\nAge: 28 years.\n\n3. Sidlingappa @ Mudakappa,\nS/o Chandranaik Revannavar,\nAge: 26 years.\n\n4. Kalmesh Shankreppa Udkeri,\nAge: 23 years.\n\n5. Rajshekhar @ Gangappa Udkeri,\nS/o Chanbasappa Udkeri,\nAge: 40 years.\n\n6. Bhagwant Nagappa Udkeri,\nAge: 32 years.\n\n7. Chandranaik Mallanaik\nRevennavar,\nAge: 53 years.\n\n8." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "c11e52dcf5ab45dcb6327241a61efbec", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 1160, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 1118, "text": "Irappa Basavenneppa Udkeri,\nAge: 20 years." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "946d9ba3a72241b89a94bd9972ac69d6", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 1211, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 1160, "text": "\n\n9. Shankreppa Chanabasappa Udkeri,\nAge: 55 years." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "4f48809ddf564a4083b645d83948c55f", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 1521, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 1211, "text": "\n\nAll appellants are Respondents\nResiding at Murkibhavi,\nTq. Bailhongal,\nDist: Belgaum.\n\n(By Sri R B Naik, Sr. Counsel, for Smt. Vijetha R Naik\n & J Basavaraj, Adv., for respondents 1,4 to 6, 8 and 9)\n\n(By Sri Mallikarjun S Masali, Adv., for R-2,3 and 7)\n\n\n " } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "7449ed8dd87f462f92672f0fa9be7131", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 1715, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 1521, "text": "This Crl. R C is filed under Section 366 of the Code of\nCriminal Procedure, for confirmation of death sentence\nawarded to accused Nos.1 to 9 by the Presiding Officer, Fast\nTrack Court-II & Addl." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "e85c72f2f16e41a8b3b632fea060e0f1", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 1861, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 1716, "text": "Sessions Judge, Belgaum vide\njudgment of conviction dated 4/16.12.2008 in S C\nNo.28/2006.\n\n CRL.A. NO.2516/2009\n\n1." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "69e1896eb6604c17b14b505dfc4ee157", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 1916, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 1862, "text": "Sri Sundresh,\nS/o Basavanneppa Udikeri,\nAge: 22 years." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "085917d318284eb0aee1028ade0655a8", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 1977, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 1918, "text": "2. Sri Kalmesh,\nS/o Shankareppa Udikeri,\nAge: 23 years.\n\n3." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "7b048b92cb8342a781a50f0b8eeb7504", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 2047, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 1978, "text": "Sri Rajshekhar @ Gangappa,\nS/o Chandranaik Revannavar,\nAge: 40 years." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "b9ccefc581754cf8bee19d30df0dd9ca", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 2101, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 2049, "text": "4. Sri Bhagwant,\nS/o Nagappa Udikeri,\nAge: 32 years." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "024de5e0b8414be7b7b6f8dbcb38d17c", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 2157, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 2103, "text": "5. Sri Irappa,\nS/o Basavaneppa Udikeri,\nAge: 20 years." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "1c1a3dcd57e74fbeb4b3117b97d5bdad", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 2276, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 2157, "text": "\n\n6. Sri Shankreppa,\nA/o Chanbasappa Udikeri,\nAge: 55 years.\n\n7. Smt. Gourawwa,\nW/o Nagappa Udikeri,\nAge: 47 years.\n\n8." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "ed0c5b3b9f7b4a4e8c1c4744e7190ac5", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 2334, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 2277, "text": "Sri Basavanneppa,\nS/o Chanbasappa Udikeri,\nAge: 58 years." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "43ffc5327e3d471e89d148923d2ee8f5", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 2391, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 2334, "text": "\n\n9. Sri Nagappa,\nS/o Chanbasappa Udikeri,\nAge: 57 years." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "d242cdab2dca41e0a80e4abefacf3c73", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 2762, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 2391, "text": "\n\nAll appellants are Appellants\nResiding at Murkibhavi,\nTq. Bailhongal,\nDist: Belgaum.\n\n(By Sri R B Naik, Sr. Counsel, for Smt. Vijetha R Naik\n & J Basavaraj, Adv., for appellants)\n\nAND\n\nThe State of Karnataka\n\n(Through Nesargi Police Station),\n\nRepresented by its\n\nState Public Prosecutor,\n\nHigh Court of Karnataka,\n\nBangalore." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "24cb2855fc3647daaa6aef909b46e5cd", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 2871, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 2812, "text": "Respondent\n\n(By Sri V M Banakar, Addl. SPP, for respondent)" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "141064d6cae84da1994f8e83771d1fa6", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 3260, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 2871, "text": "\n\n Criminal Appeal No.2516/2009 is filed under Section\n374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying to set\n\naside the judgment and order of conviction and sentence\nrecorded by the Fast Track-II and Addl. Sessions Judge,\nBelgaum, in S C No.28/2006 by its order of conviction dated\n4.12.2008 and sentence dated 16.12.2008.\n\n CRL.A. NO.2535/2009\n\n1." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "540d9a5650f1491295a3590605be4047", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 3324, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 3261, "text": "Siddappa Revannavar,\nS/o Chandrakant Revannavar,\nAge: 28 years." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "d0a6b59ad7184ca89d1173a07d9ce2b0", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 3411, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 3326, "text": "2. Sidlingappa @ Mudakappa Revannavar,\nS/o Chandrakant Revannavar,\nAge: 26 years.\n\n3." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "ad51e7cd450b411da53befb0b4d68d7e", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 3476, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 3412, "text": "Chandranaik Revannavar,\nS/o Mallanaik Revannavar,\nAge: 53 years." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "ce48e539c1f4410592f3ed5b69597db4", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 4219, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 3476, "text": "\n\nAll the appellants are residing at Appellants\nMurkibhavi, Tq. Bailhongal,\nDist. Belgaum.\n\n(By Sri Mallikarjun S Masali & C H Jadhav, Advs., for\n appellants)\n\nAND\n\nThe State of Karnataka Respondent\nBy Nesargi Police Station,\nRepresented by its\nState Public Prosecutor,\nHigh Court of Karnataka,\nBangalore.\n\n(By Sri V M Banakar, Addl. SPP)\n\n\n Criminal Appeal No.2535/2009 is filed under Section\n374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying to set\naside the judgment and order of conviction and sentence\nrecorded by the Fast Track-II and Addl. Sessions Judge,\nBelgaum, in S C No.28/2006 by its order of conviction dated\n4.12.2008 and sentence dated 16.12.2008.\n\n CRL.A. NO.2536/2009\n\n1." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "a9f9ff98d03849d9852878c5dcb0f177", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 4295, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 4220, "text": "Mallawwa Chandranaik Revannavar,\nW/o Chandranaik Revannavar,\nAge: 47 years." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "8c3eae2af97b4a4998319c18caa7ba64", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 4541, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 4295, "text": "\n\n2. Sakranaik Revennavar,\nS/o Mallanaik Revannavar,\nAge: 54 years.\n\n3. Doddanaik Revannavar,\nS/o Mallanaik Revennavar,\nAge: 50 years.\n\nAll the appellants are residing at\nMurkibhavi,\n\nTq. Bailhongal, Appellants\nDist: Belgaum." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "cbf5329dd0564c4bb1731008aaf4b69a", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 4596, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 4543, "text": "(By Sri Mallikarjun S Masali & C H Jadhav, Advs., for" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "ae5b8af3b006461da05b278c00d38667", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 4607, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 4596, "text": "\nappellants" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "cbbb883f10954f7eb663ebd454d32e58", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 4685, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 4607, "text": ")\n\nAND\n\nThe State of Karnataka Respondent" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "ceb95e21917d4644926dd1c32eb373d4", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 4864, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 4686, "text": "By Nesargi Police Station,\nRepresented by its\nState Public Prosecutor,\nHigh Court of Karnataka,\nBangalore.\n\n(By Sri V M Banakar, Addl. SPP)\n\n Criminal Appeal No.2536/2009" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "f9b0f401c10542d9a0711208167f08cc", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 5168, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 4865, "text": "is filed under Section\n374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying to set\naside the judgment and order of conviction and sentence\nrecorded by the Fast Track-II and Addl. Sessions Judge,\nBelgaum, in S C No.28/2006 by its order of conviction dated\n4.12.2008 and sentence dated 16.12.2008.\n\n " } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "f36aa5112ff44ad1afcbf8f42a82d453", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 5389, "labels": [ "PREAMBLE" ], "start": 5168, "text": "The Crl. R C and the Appeals coming on for hearing, the\nsame having been heard and reserved for pronouncement of\nJudgment, Dr. Bhakthavatsala, J., delivered the following:\n\n JUDGMENT\n " } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "42a472e634ca4ee0baeb9c3acc23faa4", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 5665, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 5389, "text": "By order dated 16.12.2008 made in SC No.28/2006, Fast Track Court-II/Addl. Sessions Judge at Belgaum, seeks confirmation of death sentence awarded against accused Nos.1 to 9 for the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, on four counts." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "9cd2380664e24cb2949dde1d561d6857", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 5762, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 5666, "text": "It is registered under Section 366 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in Criminal R C No.11/2009." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "17a04223fb2444eb83a701b9448073c4", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 5998, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 5762, "text": "\n 2. Criminal Appeals in Nos.2516/2009, 2535/2009 and 2536/2009 have been filed by the accused Nos.1 to 15 challenging the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence passed against them for the various offences in the above-said case." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "7b01d929c7ee4d2980d088ba5e3338d0", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 6254, "labels": [ "NONE" ], "start": 5998, "text": "\n 3. Since these cases arise out of the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 16.12.2008 made in SC No.28/2006 on the file of Fast Track Court at Belgaum, we have heard common arguments and proceeding to dispose off these cases by this common judgment." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "0a40e3caa6344d0f90be2a56aab93384", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 6523, "labels": [ "NONE" ], "start": 6254, "text": "\n 4. For the purpose of convenience and better understanding, respondents Nos.1 to 9 in Crl. RC No.11/2009 and appellants in Criminal Appeal Nos.2516/2009, 2535/2009 and 2536/2009 are hereinafter referred to as `Accused Nos.1 to 15' as arraigned before the trial Court." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "a6bcf167a48945e9945a1b8fdb48f34a", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 6650, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 6523, "text": "\n 5. Brief facts of the case leading to registering of the Reference Case under Section 366 of Cr. P C, may be stated as under:" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "abbf4029e5a14cda86adc58ccaef4f7c", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 6864, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 6651, "text": "By the impugned judgment dated 16.12.2008, learned Sessions Judge convicted all the 15 accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 307, 302, 506, 504 read with section 149/114 of IPC." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "ed6b4b4591b044b48eb9fdda01cad2b4", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 7107, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 6865, "text": "After hearing the accused on the point of sentence, Learned Sessions Judge has passed further judgment awarding death sentence as against accused Nos.1 to 9, for the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w Section 149 of IPC, on four counts." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "e738da5fb9e44df79bae6f3b29d3d5a0", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 7248, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 7108, "text": "As required under sub-section (1) of Section 366 of Cr.PC, learned trial Judge has submitted the records for confirmation of Death sentence." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "6ca22e9aee2f49458596cf3e5980c7dc", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 7403, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 7248, "text": "\n 6. Brief facts of the case leading to the filing of other three Appeals by the accused Nos.1 to 15 under Section 374(2) of Cr.P C may be stated as under:" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "b45e033f13ab40f9a7ad6e08d40bb54b", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 7540, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 7404, "text": "The complainant-Suresh Siddappa Wodeyar (PW-1) and his family members are permanent residents of Murkibhavi village in Bailhongal Taluk." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "5b2bb3dbc46146aaa759602b5e2f076e", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 7638, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 7541, "text": "The complainant's father has 7 brothers and all of them were residing together in the same place." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "990889b964f445eeaa22a520bd397d91", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 7707, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 7639, "text": "Ulavappa (husband of P.W-3) is the elder brother of the complainant." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "41d9fa7e1b50457eb3a81b86ad9c7335", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 8108, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 7708, "text": "It is stated that one and half years prior to 30.8.2005 ( i.e., the date of incident), when Kasturi-P.W3, had gone to Kumbarbhavi to fetch water, accused No.3/Sidlingappa and accused No.1/Sundresh picked up quarrel with her and poured water on her; she informed about the incident to her family members; they questioned the accused No.1/Sundresh and accused No.7/Chandranaik and their family members." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "ee63f4f083b349f2b311b3ab74eed28b", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 8186, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 8109, "text": "For which, the accused quarreled with the complainant and his family members." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "8d4d0bff5e6242e79def963c92a0cced", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 8335, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 8187, "text": "It is also alleged that accused No.1/Sundresh and accused No.3/Sidlingappa were often teasing P.W.3 and blocking her way whenever she went to lands." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "cf4b9a13de7a421b8eab3840caab1c41", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 8551, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 8336, "text": "It is alleged that accused No.10/Mallawwa (wife of accused No.7/Chandranaik) used to taunt and challenge the complainant's family members and threatened with dire consequences if they lodged a complaint with Police." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "097917d9407b4e8b9cdd7670570bc5dd", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 8852, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 8551, "text": "\n Further case of the prosecution is that on 29.8.2005 (Monday), at about 8.00 a m, when the complainant was washing his bullocks, Accused No.10/Mallawwa and Accused No.2/Siddappa, who were standing on the upstairs of their house, picked up quarrel with the complainant-P.W.1 and threw chappal at him." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "48afa6f2c8374285822a9b21d0f0f0dd", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 8980, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 8853, "text": "He informed about the incident to his family members, for which they told him that a complaint would be lodged on the next day." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "8472ab5030fb4dd498c28a06f37055b6", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 9159, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 8981, "text": "On 30.8.2005 (Tuesday) at about 6.30 AM, when the complainant-P.W1 was going to answer nature's call, Accused No.10/Mallawwa instigated the Accused to kill the complainant-P.W.1." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "a434e4971d0644e787161c47a93887bb", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 9220, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 9160, "text": "Accordingly, Accused No.1/Sundresh, Accused No.2/Siddappa," } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "aa339b34bdcf409798ad418483f5d082", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 9963, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 9221, "text": " Accused No.3/Sidlingappa, Accused No.4/Kalmesh, Accused No.5/Rajshekhar, Accused No.6/Bhagwant and one Shivappa Chanbasappa Udkeri, Rudrappa Shankrappa Udkeri, Sidlingappa Apanna Konnennawar, Accused No.15/Doddanaik, Accused No.14/Sakranaik, Raju Sidlingappa Konnennawar, Accused No.12/Basavanneppa and Accused No.7/Chandranaik chased the complainant-P.W.1, who raised hue and cry and went inside his house; at that time, the complainant's grand father/Siddlingappa (the deceased) and his deceased uncles Mallappa and Nagappa, who are residents of the same lane, came and complainant's wife-Ratnawwa also came out of the house holding a plastic mug to go for nature's call; she requested the Accused not to do anything to her husband(PW- 1)." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "3840f08b15244891ba54f7c6a9301cd8", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 10068, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 9964, "text": "But on the other hand Accused No.2 assaulted Ratnawwa with kyota on left side of her chest and left arm." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "f9008de5c89e4f99ac40e9cd870c1ec1", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 10326, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 10069, "text": "Seeing the incident, grand father and uncles of the complaint were proceeding towards Police Station to lodge a complaint, but the Accused accosted them and assaulted and also threatened the public with dire consequences, if they intervened in their action." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "595088de123f4906b90232ced9113b77", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 10484, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 10327, "text": "Thus, the Accused assaulted Siddlingappa, Mallappa and Nagappa (grand father and uncles of the complainant) with koyta, axe, sickle, jambia, stick and stone." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "adc2e7bb50ef4ef6b5e2dc26e7b14de5", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 10537, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 10485, "text": "PW-1 lodged a complaint with Nesargi Police Station." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "58de170fb0d24c64a02cd6769125fef8", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 10718, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 10538, "text": "The Police registered a case in Crime No.72/2005 on 30.8.2005 at about 8.15 A.M., for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302, 109 and 506 r/w section 149 of IPC." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "07d63daa44d443509040c095901d35b1", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 10782, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 10719, "text": "During the course of investigation, panchanamas were conducted." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "553ddb70ae8e417b93fa04ae90bfa004", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 10882, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 10783, "text": "Accused were arrested and recorded their voluntary statement and seized the incriminating articles." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "c59183f9a58649f1b9c9645bd52e1e81", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 11074, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 10883, "text": "After the investigation was over, charge sheet came to be laid against the Accused for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 307, 302, 114, 506 and 504 r/w Section 149 of IPC." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "b4b2f59f292f4f87b8923c7fa972d504", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 11258, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 11075, "text": "Since the offence under Sections 307 and 302 of IPC are exclusively triable by a Court of Sessions, the case was committed to Sessions Court, where it was registered as SC No.28/2006." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "c40785dbe50d41f9ba87c43f41474ce7", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 11454, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 11259, "text": "The trial Court, after hearing arguments, framed charges against all the 15 persons for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302, 307, 114, 506, 504 read with Section 149 of IPC." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "5adee46b317b43afab2829b0a1cfeffb", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 11511, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 11454, "text": "\nAccused have pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "486462784f1c45f183f7183a9ffcc305", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 11631, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 11512, "text": "The prosecution went to trial by examining as many as 48 witnesses and got marked 66 documents and 38 Material Objects." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "2549534520ef40b39e63060ac7e25d08", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 11708, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 11632, "text": "The defence has got marked a portion of complaint- Ext.P-1 as Ext.D1 and D2." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "2daffc14f012450eaeb412aa3affec10", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 11774, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 11709, "text": "Statement of the Accused under Section 313 of Cr.PC was recorded." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "4be4b74197994727b65d12a103be2cee", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 11882, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 11775, "text": "Accused have denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing in the evidence of prosecution witnesses." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "f6f01bbd0d3e4f209bffc941c43d470d", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 11926, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 11883, "text": "They have not adduced any defence evidence." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "7300d4a8b0e1475f8fa08fdd48401dac", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 12210, "labels": [ "RLC" ], "start": 11927, "text": "The trial Court, after hearing arguments, perusing oral and documentary evidence on record, came to a conclusion that the prosecution brought home the guilt to the Accused for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302, 307, 114, 506, 504 read with section 149 of IPC." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "e1cbd90085dd44009691b3f663ea771f", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 12441, "labels": [ "RLC" ], "start": 12210, "text": "\nAfter hearing the accused, on the point of sentence, held that the case falls within the scope of `rarest of the rare case' and awarded death sentence to Accused Nos.1 to 9 for the offence under Section 302 of IPC, on four counts." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "d2e6191341c248199a6254ac9d6dc5f9", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 13720, "labels": [ "RLC" ], "start": 12441, "text": "\n Further, Accused Nos.1 to 15 were sentenced to undergo- (i) imprisonment for 3 months and pay fine of `5,000/- each, in default in payment of fine, to undergo imprisonment for 2 months for the offence under Section 143 of IPC; (ii) imprisonment for 6 months and pay fine of `5,000/- each, in default in payment of fine, to undergo imprisonment for 3 months for the offence under Section 147 of IPC; (iii) imprisonment for 9 months and pay fine of `6,000/- each, in default in payment of fine to undergo imprisonment for 4 months for the offence under Section 148 of IPC; and (iv) imprisonment for a period of 10 years and pay fine of `10,000/- each, in default in payment of fine, to undergo imprisonment for 2 years for the offence under Section 307 of IPC (i.e., attempt to commit murder of P.W1-Suresh and P.W5- Maruthi; Further, Accused Nos.10 to 15 were sentenced to undergo - (a) imprisonment for life and pay fine of `10,000/- each, in default in payment of fine to undergo imprisonment for 3 years for the offence under Section 114 of IPC; (b) Imprisonment for 2 years for the offence punishable under Section 506 of IPC; and (c) to pay fine of `1,000/- each, in default in payment of fine, imprisonment for 2 months for the offence punishable under Section 504 of IPC." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "f3c9975ae4c5479d9d4e491e0d2e6461", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 13809, "labels": [ "RLC" ], "start": 13720, "text": "\n The trial court has ordered that the substantive sentences shall run one after another." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "9bf16f0928454beeb4a20b086cdb7877", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 13844, "labels": [ "FAC" ], "start": 13809, "text": "\nThis is impugned in these Appeals." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "0928617e3bb24d67a27fbba87ea24e7e", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 14148, "labels": [ "ARG_RESPONDENT" ], "start": 13844, "text": "\n 7. Sri V M Banakar, learned Addl. SPP appearing for the state, submitted that since four persons were brutally murdered with deadly weapons, the trial Court has rightly classified the case as \"rarest of rare cases\" and awarded death sentence as against Accused Nos.1 to 9 and the same may be confirmed." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "25bb9bca550544ad835fdeab8280b01f", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 14547, "labels": [ "ARG_RESPONDENT" ], "start": 14149, "text": "He also submitted that the trial Court, on proper appreciation of oral and documentary evidence placed on record, rightly reached the conclusion that the prosecution has proved the guilt to the accused for the charges levelled against them and awarded adequate sentence for the offences and there is no merit in the Appeals filed by the Accused and the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "669fd009e2b3497a9fc9dab687341347", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 14760, "labels": [ "ARG_RESPONDENT" ], "start": 14548, "text": "He has cited a decision reported in (2010) 1 SCC (CRI) 925 (DILIP PREMNARAYAN TIWARI AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA) on the point of appreciation of evidence in so for as the discrepancies/omissions in FIR." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "6a83b144777c42438d8324ffe997a9a3", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 15072, "labels": [ "ARG_PETITIONER" ], "start": 14760, "text": "\n 8. Sri R B Naik, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Sri Basavaraj, for Accused Nos.1, 4 to 6,8,9,11,12 and 13, submitted that the trial Court erred in convicting the Accused solely on the basis of interested testimony of the witnesses, though all independent eye witnesses have turned hostile to prosecution." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "617ebc7201184f38a591f8389d83fffb", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 15295, "labels": [ "ARG_PETITIONER" ], "start": 15073, "text": "He further submits that though, the alleged eye witnesses, have not witnessed the incident, the trial Court erred in accepting their evidence as gospel truth to base conviction for the offences alleged against the accused." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "3995b0ca82cf4599a3d13d3b2d826b7d", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 15409, "labels": [ "ARG_PETITIONER" ], "start": 15296, "text": "He further submitted that the case on hand cannot be treated as a `rarest of rare cases' to award death sentence." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "8043d7912bd84ce6a1f487939c1fd5f1", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 15586, "labels": [ "ARG_PETITIONER" ], "start": 15410, "text": "He prayed that the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence awarded against the Accused may be set aside and the all the accused may acquitted of the offences alleged them." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "1bc105141f8d4a12a9c9d5f2c88641a9", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 16274, "labels": [ "ARG_PETITIONER" ], "start": 15587, "text": "He has cited the following decisions: (i) AIR 1958 SC 935 (PURANMAL AGARWALLA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA) on the point that the offender shall not be punished with a more severe punishment than the Court which tries him could award for any one of such offences; (ii) (1988) 4 SCC 183 (MOHD. AKHTAR HUSSAIN ALIAS IBRAHIM AHMED BHATTI Vs.\n ASSISTANT COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS(PREVENTION), AHMEDABAD AND ANOTHER) on the point that the Courts must take into consideration the usual factors while imposing sentences; and (iii) (2010) 1 SCC 573 (RAMRAJ ALIAS NANHOO ALIAS BIHNU Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH) on the point that imprisonment for life sentence was substituted for death sentence." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "a240013b8dfc4439abe79d3dd4b680f3", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 16427, "labels": [ "ARG_PETITIONER" ], "start": 16276, "text": "9. Sri Masali, learned Counsel appearing for Accused Nos.2,3 and 7, 10,14 and 15, adopted the arguments of the learned Senior Counsel, Sri Ravi B Naik." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "3ec257734c924281b55de907bd81bea8", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 17075, "labels": [ "ARG_PETITIONER" ], "start": 16428, "text": "He relied upon the following decisions: (i) 2003(7) SCC 141 (RAM PAL Vs. STATE OF U.P.) on the point that in the case of multiple murder, death sentence was altered to imprisonment for life.\n (ii) 2011(10) SCC 389 (SHAM Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA on the point that death sentence was commuted to life imprisonment; (iii) 2011(13) SCC 706 (RAJESH KUMAR Vs.\n STATE) on the point of mitigating circumstances relating to death penalty; (iv) 2012(4) SCC 289 (BRAJENDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF M.P) on the point of mental imbalance of the Accused at the time of committing crime and gravity of mitigating circumstances while awarding death sentence.\n 10." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "5914186822ba402d9393366d9ac0e475", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 17221, "labels": [ "ISSUE" ], "start": 17076, "text": "In the light of the arguments addressed by the learned Counsels for the parties, we formulate the following points for our consideration: (i) " } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "469a84c8d05048ae88dd7930bce0a13b", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 17228, "labels": [ "ISSUE" ], "start": 17221, "text": "Whether" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "5dd468491ecf45afa66487d4d12d9506", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 17395, "labels": [ "ISSUE" ], "start": 17229, "text": "the trial Court is justified in convicting Accused Nos.1 to 15 for the offences punishable under Sections 114, 143, 147, 148, 307, 302, 506 and 504 r/w 149 of I P C ?" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "957ccb3ccf0b4deb96a2dc006ef1d4fa", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 17564, "labels": [ "ISSUE" ], "start": 17395, "text": "\n (ii) Whether the trial Court is justified in awarding death sentence as against accused Nos.1 to 9 for the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w Section 149 of IPC?" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "3278e7aec1de4ff1869da83b3779156a", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 17787, "labels": [ "ISSUE" ], "start": 17564, "text": "\n (iii) Whether the impugned order of sentence passed as against accused Nos.1 to 9 for the offences punishable under Sections 114, 143, 147, 148, 307, 504, 506 r/w Section 149 of IPC calls for interference by this Court ?" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "ecdcdf2ab43949908ef142307970d77f", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 18027, "labels": [ "ISSUE" ], "start": 17787, "text": "\n (iv) Whether the impugned order of sentence passed as against accused Nos.10 to 15 for the offences punishable under Sections 114, 143, 147, 148, 307, 302, 506 and 504 r/w149 of IPC calls for interference by this Court ?\n (v)What order?" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "40a5c6f99a454337a52c53d4bb2b5748", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 18163, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 18029, "text": "11. For the purpose of convenience and better understanding, we proceed to take up points (i) to (iv) together for consideration.\n 12." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "9e1bfb9bd0684168b7b9dfea230b23f7", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 18316, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 18164, "text": "At the very outset, it must be mentioned that the alleged independent eye witnesses - P.Ws.6 to 15, 20 to 24 have not supported the case of prosecution." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "af5fb7a7355a46cf81f6c2c3ac458aa5", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 18609, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 18317, "text": "Mahazar Witnesses namely PW-16 /Subhash Honnanaik Patil, P.W- 17/Laxman Gangappa Naik, P.W18/Mallesh Basavanneppa Karennavar, P.W19/Nagappa Adeveppa Patteda, P.W27/Mallanaik Sanganaik Baganavar and P.W31/Honappa Yallappa Sattennavar also did not support the case of prosecution." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "fc52f2b6dbad405ebbf3c079063d91d4", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 18681, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 18610, "text": "P.W30 inquest mahazar witness has partly turned hostile to prosecution." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "4a85914a5d8a41918f3b6dcdc979f6b7", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 19031, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 18682, "text": "The witnesses, who have supported the case of prosecution, can be described as under: (i) P.W.1the Complainant and P.Ws.2 to 5 and 32 are eye witnesses; (ii) P.Ws.25 and 26 are the inquest mahazar witnesses with regard to the deceased-Ratnavva; (iii) P.W.28 is the inquest mahazar witness with regard to the deceased- Siddlingappa;" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "2b4d5f164bbd4e2296e5aad94f2a89d9", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 20014, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 19032, "text": "(iv) P.W29/Pundalik Bhimappa Wadeyar is the inquest mahazar witness with regard to the deceased Nagappa; (v) P.W33-Raju Nesargi is a seizure mahazar witness regarding seizure of motor cycle at the instance of Accused No.2 and Accused No.6; regarding seizure of an axe at the instance of Accused No.6 and two longs at the instance of Accused No2 (vi) P.Ws-13,38, P.Ws.40,41,45 and 48, are Police personnel who assisted the investing officers during investigation; (vii) 24 (viii) P.W-39/Ganapati is the PSI, who (ix) registered the case in Crime (x) No.72/2005 of Nesargi Police Station and submitted FIR (Ex.P40); P.W-44/Sharanappa and P.W47/Sonia Narang are the Investigating Officers; P.W-42/Dr. Pushpa H R-lady Medical Officer, who conducted autopsy over the deceased Ratnavva; and P.W.43/Dr.M.S.Hottigimatt is the Medical Officer who conducted autopsy over three the deceased persons namely, Siddalingappa, Nagappa and Mallappa.\n 13." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "c90cd0df68694981be93e68c9558e168", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 20324, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 20015, "text": "The bone of contention of the defence is that as all the independent eye witnesses have not supported the case of prosecution, the trial Court erred in convicting the accused for the alleged offences solely on the basis of interested testimony of the witnesses who are related to deceased and the complainant." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "577bf0a93eaf4247b06d2255c674efc8", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 20800, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 20325, "text": "It is also contended that FIR was registered against 16 persons, but the Investigating Officer, has given up the accused viz., Accused Nos.7/Shivappa Chanabasappa Udakeri, Accused No.10/Raju Siddalingappa Konnanavar and Accused No.13/Siddalingappa Appanna Konnanavar mentioned in the FIR, and filed charge sheet adding three other persons, viz., accused No.9/Shankreppa Chanabasappa Udkeri, Accused No.11/Gowrawwa Nagappa Udkeri and accused No.13/Nagappa Chanabasappa Udkeri." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "1b09e2ad15b54842afa5c4d2cd2fc7cc", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 20891, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 20801, "text": "It is also contended that in the FIR, there was no allegation against accused No.8/Irappa." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "bcbcc9f8eea742d08dc3dfb1cd9af128", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 21005, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 20891, "text": "\n 14. Now, we proceed to state as to relationship of the Accused among them and their age at the time of incident." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "0f28083e2c9a4524b3fe18963fecbfdf", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 21120, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 21006, "text": "Accused No.7/Chandranaik and his wife-accused No.10/Mallawwa were residing in the house nearby to the complainant." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "e4b5348b0042422eb765a0669a78af2f", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 21215, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 21121, "text": "Accused No.2/Siddappa and Accused No.3/Sidlingappa are the children of Accused Nos.7 and 10.\n " } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "4849e6d7dd6846e1a07cfa6cb088842b", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 21308, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 21215, "text": "Accused No.14/Sakranaik and Accused No.15/Doddanaik are the younger brothers of Accused No.7." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "8848b12eda9547e8859ea113f63b1299", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 21372, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 21309, "text": "Accused No.13/Nagappa is the husband of Accused No.11/Gourawwa." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "8d2d31d4a92348d9997b865624bf83c1", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 21465, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 21372, "text": "\nAccused No.5/Rajshekhar, Accused No.9/Shankreppa and Accused No.12/Basavaneppa are brothers." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "fdb739a0da3840dcbfac6a752e440191", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 21554, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 21466, "text": "Accused No.1/Sundresh and Accused No.8/Irappa are the sons of Accused No.12/Basavaneppa." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "99ad230a18f84ef4b197d41c152a1489", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 21613, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 21555, "text": "Accused No.6/Bhagwant is the son of Accused No.13/Nagappa." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "129f89489ca4403d822c44a6880ca940", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 21673, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 21614, "text": "Accused No.4/Kalmesh is the son of Accused No.9/Shankreppa." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "ada729724e5d4f1aa425e58824324241", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 21817, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 21674, "text": "Accused No.10/Mallawwa is the sister of Accused No.5/Rajshekhar, Accused No.9/Shankreppa, Accused No.12/Basavanneppa and Accused No.13/Nagappa." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "f01a79ad0a7b4996b8d6ee6f51337105", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 21958, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 21818, "text": "Accused Nos.1 to 9 are aged about 28 years, 26 years, 24 years, 21 years, 38 years, 30 years, 51 years, 18 years and 53 years, respectively." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "70ad205312ef4ae69da6e8a2ac4c4531", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 22111, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 21958, "text": "\n 15. According to the case of prosecution, Accused No.1/Sundresh, Accused No.2/Siddappa, Accused No.5/Rajshekhar and 11/Gowravva were armed with axe." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "9805f96685a643d6a391d77fccd0d92c", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 22194, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 22112, "text": "It is pertinent to mention that the weapon 'long' is called as 'kyota' in Kannada." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "9b40c21c35c04c47a60a832723f3542d", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 22325, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 22215, "text": "27 Accused No.3/Siddlingappa, Accused No.4/Kalmesh and Accused No.7/Chandranaik were armed with 'long'/'koyta." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "19b6d1b752514a48af201619e37ac0af", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 22436, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 22326, "text": "The alleged abettors namely Accused Nos.10 to 15 are aged about 44, 45, 56, 52, 57 and 48 years, respectively." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "e0104b14b6ac47e492230c43925fd58b", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 23343, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 22438, "text": "16. From the evidence of P.Ws.1,2,3,4,5 and 32, Accused No.1/Sundresh assaulted Ratnavva, Mallappa and Nagappa with an axe; Accused No.2 assaulted Ratnavva and Nagappa with a 'long'/koitha; Accused No.3 assaulted Siddlingappa and Mallappa with a 'long/koitha'; Accused No.4 assaulted Siddalingappa on the neck with a koitha/long; Accused No.5 assaulted Mallappa on the shoulder with an axe; Accused No.6 assaulted Nagappa on the head and back with an axe; Accused No.7 assaulted Mallappa on the face with a koyta/long; Accused No.8 assaulted Siddalingappa on the shoulder with an axe and Accused No.9 assaulted Ratnavva with an axe on the left hand and Siddalingappa on the left shoulder. It is in the evidence of the complainant/P.Ws.1, P.Ws.2,3,4,5 and 32 that Accused No.10/Mallawwa (wife of Accused No.7) abetted the commission of offence and also assaulted Siddalingappa on his forehead with a stone." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "4290be603c2b46d9a875f7408cf7de8c", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 23421, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 23343, "text": "\nFurther, A-11 to 15 instigated the accused kill PW.1-Suresh and PW.5-Maruthi." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "e51522ee493e4a039c738c32b29038c9", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 23791, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 23422, "text": "Charge sheet reveals that accused named in FIR namely Accused No.7/Shivappa Chanabasappa Udakeri, Accused No.10/Raju Siddalingappa Konnanavar and Accused No.13/Siddalingappa Appanna Konnanavar were given up while adding Accused No.9/Shankreppa Chanabasappa Udkeri, Accused No.11/Gourawwa Nagappa Udkeri and Accused No.13/Nagappa Chanabasappa Udkeri in the charge sheet." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "40c3de227fac4804a7549e6a747c31fa", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 23829, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 23792, "text": "Accused Nos.9,12 and 13 are brothers." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "27d4a7f253d54b71b716c1bd7ed1b3be", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 23977, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 23830, "text": "All the independent eye witnesses, viz., P.Ws.6 to 15, P.Ws.20 to 24 have not supported the case of prosecution for the reasons best known to them." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "963cffe153dd473b8d68569bd604d9b3", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 24108, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 23978, "text": "Merely because those witnesses have not deposed in support of the prosecution, case of the prosecution cannot be rejected in toto." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "9c6f3152600a4b888438da092e1b1e3b", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 24252, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 24109, "text": "Therefore,the evidence of P.Ws.1, 2,3,4,5 and 32, who are the eye witnesses cum related to the complainant require to be scrutinized carefully." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "eea38eaafbbc456384db4da5dc6f979f", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 24351, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 24253, "text": "In our view, there is no strong ground to reject their evidence in toto for the following reasons." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "bfdaaddc31284cbaa7717127cc37e51d", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 24523, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 24351, "text": "\n 17. P.W1-Suresh, aged about 28 years, is the husband of the deceased-Ratnavva and grand son of the deceased Siddalingappa and nephew of the deceased Nagappa and Mallappa." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "c704cda5ff3c4e78900d3607f5946464", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 24610, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 24524, "text": "He has deposed in evidence that the deceased Siddalingappa had 8 sons and 2 daughters." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "79ddaeb3eec64343ad24893655fee489", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 24951, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 24611, "text": "P.W-1 has deposed that his father-Siddappa died about 14 years back prior to the incident and his senior uncle-Basappa and his father though living in the same house of Siddalingappa, they had separate mess; whereas other 6 sons including the deceased Mallappa and Nagappa were living together with Siddalingappa and they had a common mess." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "a318a635cb3d472bb3a93995e4891322", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 24998, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 24951, "text": "\nP.W2/Bhagawwa N Wadeyar is the sister of P.W1." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "90c1543768ef411d9615dc463a6cab71", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 25054, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 24999, "text": "Ulavappa Siddappa Wadeyar is the elder brother of P.W1." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "1eeb3f109df948b9890b27f388d3e653", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 25255, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 25055, "text": "According to P.W-1, about 1 year prior to the incident, when P.W3/Kasturi (w/o P.W1's elder brother-Ulavappa Siddappa Wadeyar) had been to fetch water, Accused Nos.1 and 3 poured water and pulled her." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "c073162f5bf24a049e051f3e733e4d6d", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 25369, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 25256, "text": "She informed about the incident to her family members including deceased persons; they enquired with the Accused." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "d759c0c8f5af4a198aaa812df0000f78", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 25731, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 25371, "text": "Since then, Accused No.10/Mallawwa used to abuse the family members of the complainant, in vulgar language, whenever they went in front of her house; when P.W3/Kasturi was proceeding towards the land; Accused Nos.1 and 3 teased and abused her in vulgar language and also restrained her from proceeding further.\n She informed the incident to the family members." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "6796dac57316483ab5a7b3535d869931", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 25794, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 25732, "text": "When they questioned the Accused, there was exchange of words." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "4b57bdc055774c04a0acbd49e5d14590", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 26006, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 25795, "text": "Again on 29.8.2005, at about 8.00 am, when the complainant was washing bullocks in front of his house, Accused No.10/Mallawwa, who was standing on the staircase of her house, teased him and threw slipper at him." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "90ffe0c3d4c044dea69dc02e50e2e549", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 26076, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 26007, "text": "Accused No.10 and Accused No.2 threatened him with dire consequences." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "6b0ee43c84224b13923f84bfc3b002e4", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 26415, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 26078, "text": "Again, on 30.8.2005, at about 7.00 a m, when the complainant was going to attend nature's call, Accused Nos.1 to 9 were armed with long and axes etc., came along with other accused namely Accused Nos.10,11,12,13,14 and 15 and challenged the complainant and his family members and attempted to kill the complainant and his family members." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "8de61a385e96411cadd8977ccaee9d58", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 26584, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 26416, "text": "It is the case of the prosecution that on 30.8.2005 at about 6.30 a.m., all the Accused started chasing the complainant; he made hue and cry and went in side his house." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "a9cdec2689484060a8a6987029db7621", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 26816, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 26585, "text": "On hearing the hue and cry of Pw-1, his wife Ratnavva came to the entrance of their house and requested the Accused not to assault her husband-P.W.1, but Accused Nos.1, 2 and 9 assaulted her and killed at the entrance of her house." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "11ef2641d17b4772ac2395cf775e3cd0", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 26904, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 26817, "text": "P.W1 has deposed that he was hearing and also watching the scene from inside the house." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "9402cf7ff99948e4b687183f496a39c2", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 27556, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 26905, "text": "Thereafter, his grand father/Siddalingappa and uncles- Mallappa and Nagappa were proceeding towards Police Station to lodge a complain against the Accused and at that time Accused Nos.1 and 5 assaulted his uncle-Mallappa with axe and Accused Nos.3 and 7 with Koitha; Accused Nos.3 and 4 assaulted his grand father/Siddalingappa with koitha; whereas Accused Nos.8 and 9 assaulted Siddalingappa with an axe and Accused No.10 assaulted Siddalingappa with stone; his uncle- Nagappa was assaulted by Accused Nos.1 and 6 with an axe and Accused No.2 with long and within half an hour, the Accused killed four persons viz., his wife, uncles and grand father." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "8594d5b4aa584ae591f7a2441f7b2cab", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 27750, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 27557, "text": "It is in his evidence that after assaulting his wife Ratnavva, grandfather-Siddlingappa, uncles Nagappa and Mallappa, all the accused chased him and PW-5 Maruthi with an intention to kill them." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "f03f0fcac2a24e84b8e37fb300e6d285", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 27924, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 27751, "text": "PW.5-Maruthi escaped through Mallari Oni whereas he (PW-1) ran away from the village; 15 minutes later came to the spot and saw dead body of his wife, grandfather and uncles" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "e7c36603eb764bebb2d944c30372e81e", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 28190, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 27925, "text": "The evidence of P.W-1/complainant is corroborated by eye witnesses viz., P.W1's sister- P.W2/Bhagawwa N Wadeyar; P.W-1's elder brother's wife/P.W-4-Balawwa; his sister-in-law/P.W3-Kasturi N Wadeyar and his uncles P.W5/Maruti S Wadeyar and P.W- 32/Basappa S Wadeyar." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "6bb4cb515edc40d69b32fc416c28e2ee", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 28339, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 28190, "text": "\n 18. Now, we refer to the evidence of the Investigating Officer-Smt.Sonia Narang-PW.47 who was the Assistant Superintendent of Police at Bailhongal." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "777490f5ebb74f9bb9a5df6bd6592fe6", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 28725, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 28340, "text": "It is in her evidence that on 2.9.2005, she took up further investigation and the Circle Inspector of Police at Bailhongal produced accused Nos.1 and 4 before her with a report and she arrested them and they gave voluntary statement as per Ext.P.62 and 63, respectively and produced a Scooter bearing No.KA 24/E 1908, which was used by the accused for escaping from the scene of crime." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "d633739cf6cf43de8ecc66c817b47f07", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 28821, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 28726, "text": "She seized the said Scooter under a panchanama in the presence of P.Ws.16 and 17 as per Ex.P12." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "2b6b075d86834faaa6e68f9ddc1412e9", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 29002, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 28821, "text": "\nFurther, she has seized axe (M.O-12), blue colour shirt (M.O- 47) and while lungi (M.O-48) at instance of Accused No.1 under a panchanama in the presence of the above-said panchas." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "392ee2f1eef44799ac2ae38cd26140f6", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 29165, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 29003, "text": "Likewise she has seized one long (M.O-19), shirt (M.O-50) and black and yellow checks lungi (M.O-51) at the instance of Accused NO4, under a panchayama (Ex.P-13)." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "ff5294e84447473a96db20cd35f6c91c", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 29417, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 29166, "text": "She has further deposed that the CPI, Bailhongal, produced three accused persons viz., accused No.7/Chandranaik, accused No.3/Siddalingappa @ Mudakappa and accused No.5/Rajashekhar @ Gangappa before her on 10.9.2005 along with a report as per Ex.P-61." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "edfb40c940c148719146105876d61c7c", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 29624, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 29418, "text": "She has recorded voluntary statement of Accused NO.5 and accused No.7 as per Ex.P65; Ex.P66 respectively and recovered their clothes worn at the time of incident and weapons used in the commission of crime." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "1242d389177b408080a1bdcb34d95e58", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 29784, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 29625, "text": "She has deposed that on 16.9.2005, the ASI produced accused No.13/Nagappa Udakeri before her and she interrogated and produced him before the court for remand." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "00b1bb730d22473199d24099c8a701c1", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 29817, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 29784, "text": "\nShe received post mortem report." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "ed841f4a3afc4951afd6a985a5b2c21f", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 29926, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 29818, "text": "She has sent 47 sealed articles to FSL, Belgaum for chemical examination and filed charge sheet on 8.3.2006." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "590b8e7a17a9494889b81350a195da95", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 29968, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 29927, "text": "The FSL report has been marked as Ex.P57." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "60eea585991d486a80dcb22bec423d94", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 30178, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 29969, "text": "IN the cross-examination of P.W-47, she has deposed that since the complainant himself gave further statement stating that the other accused mentioned in the FIR did not commit any offence, they were given up." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "dc84edf38a15457d8108361bcfe243e7", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 30292, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 30179, "text": "Nothing worthwhile is elicited in her cross-examination with regard to the evidence given before the trial Court." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "4a30e5204aa445ec90ade4fbd9ee39a7", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 30465, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 30293, "text": "Ex.P-47/FSL report reveals that 47 articles were subjected to chemical analysis and all the articles except two articles viz., sample mud and lungi were stained with blood." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "a41ff3675f974fb585d26b239da5fad6", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 30504, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 30466, "text": "Serology report has not been produced." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "cb4face727cc4fec9e7434205b4a1866", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 30617, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 30504, "text": "\nEx.P.51-rough sketch of scene of crime, shows the place of crime and the place where the dead bodies were lying." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "35478a0284c8483e93d14150f1587d3e", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 30850, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 30618, "text": "All the star witnesses were cross-examined by the defence at length by learned counsel for the accused, but nothing worth while was elicited to disbelieve their oral evidence as to the role of the accused in the commission of crime." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "71a2db9a8d914bb786d50bfe5e1beb41", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 30961, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 30851, "text": "There is no major omissions and contradictions elicited in the cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "4d572e05f0dc41ab8a88fa5cd87a294a", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 31168, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 30961, "text": "\n 19. It is the case of prosecution that the Accused persons are powerful members of the community in the village and the independent witnesses have not supported the case of prosecution fearing the accused." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "d8cfa78d36f64b5ea5e978322af60b46", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 31396, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 31169, "text": "It is alleged that Accused No.10 threw chappal at the complainant and instigated the Accused persons to kill the complainant and his family members and also assaulted on the fore head of the deceased Siddalingappa with a stone." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "cad2461342824989a36eee9ea1bc1466", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 31735, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 31397, "text": "It is a fact that wife of P.W.1 was killed by the said accused in front of her house and when Siddalingappa along with his two sons-Mallappa and Nagappa were proceeding through Asundi Oni to Police Station, to lodge a complaint, the Accused persons chased them and killed and the dead bodies were lying in the same lane one after another." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "99b2582f672942b592c94027d4f3a35d", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 31849, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 31735, "text": "\nThe dead bodies lying on the street can be seen in the photographs at Exs.P26 to 29, taken at the scene of crime." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "ceee379108ba44bd8dfbeefb1319c57a", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 32200, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 31849, "text": "\nThough there is no mention in the complaint about the overt acts by Accused No.8, the evidence of the eye witnesses is sufficient to hold that all nine accused ( namely Nos.1 to 9), in pursuance of the common object and at the instigation of Accused No.10/Mallawwa, they have killed Ratnavva, Siddalingappa, Nagappa and Mallappa, within half an hour." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "36e19ae552534ab194616000d9ca2211", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 32463, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 32200, "text": "\nNo doubt the name of Accused No.9/Shankreppa does not find a place in the FIR, but during the course of recording statement of the witnesses, he was arrested and according to the evidence of eye witnesses, Accused No.9 assaulted Ratnavva and Nagappa with an axe." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "91a8f900d44142cb8b5e166f6d5d42aa", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 32591, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 32464, "text": "The contention of the learned counsel for the accused that Accused No.9 was falsely implicated in the case falls to the ground." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "eb4a20c5cd49405b8212d096bb302c61", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 32680, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 32592, "text": "The prosecution has proved that all the above said four persons died an homicidal death." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "2338f7febec24356b838825dbf2f21a4", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 33098, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 32681, "text": "Evidence on record is sufficient to hold that Accused Nos.1 to 10, with a common object, Rantnavva, Siddalingappa, Mallappa and Nagappa were killed and also attempted to kill PW.1-Suresh and PW.5-Maruthi and hence the order of conviction recorded by the trial court for the offence punishable under section 302 (on four counts) and 307 (on two counts) read with section 149 of IPC, does not call for our interference." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "a947bd4a547e4dbfbe94978c00a95c23", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 33360, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 33099, "text": "The evidence of the prosecution that accused No.11 to 15 abetted the crime is not sufficient to base conviction in the absence of cogent and satisfactory evidence and they are entitled for an order of an acquittal for all the offences alleged against them.\n 20." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "3c5c9925446549a08c8bfa590b0c6a5f", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 33486, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 33361, "text": "The trial Court has classified the case of murder as 'rarest of rare cases' and awarded death sentence to Accused Nos.1 to 9." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "e41491baeab44edab0b226d35f4617d9", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 33530, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 33487, "text": "Brutality is involved in every murder case." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "55d36f8a3e904455aac64688bc24966f", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 33592, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 33530, "text": "\nNumber of murders cannot be a ground to award death sentence." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "36d3fe7b2c2d44f98a87d389bdf8e339", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 33695, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 33593, "text": "The facts to be considered for awarding death sentence are the magnitude and the manner and brutality." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "d1050d264ffb47528973c12c5afb415d", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 33976, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 33696, "text": "In the decision reported in 2003(7) SCC 141, supra, the Apex Court has held that \"It is true that the incident in question has prematurely terminated the life of twenty-one people and the number of deaths cannot be the sole criterion for awarding the maximum punishment of death.\"" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "f940973c249744089a4a2b6309a0898a", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 34321, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 33977, "text": "In the decision reported in (2011)10 SCC 389, supra, Apex Court has held that the appellant/Accused would not be a menace to society and no reason to believe that the appellant cannot be reformed or rehabilitated or would constitute a continued threat to society and it is not the `rarest of the rare case' causing for extreme penalty of death." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "645b3196fba64332baab59a943c07943", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 34668, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 34322, "text": "In the decision reported in (2011)13 SCC 706, supra, the Apex Court has held that murder committed in a very brutal and inhuman fashion alone cannot justify death sentence and in the absence of any evidence to show that the appellant was a continuing threat to society or was beyond reform and rehabilitation, death sentence cannot be sustained.\n" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "c08d780e89cb4dcba818ccca41ddb499", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 35071, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 34668, "text": "In the case of Bachan Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in (1980)2 SCC 684, the Constitution Bench of the Apex Court has held that \"for a person convicted of murder, life imprisonment is the rule and death sentence is an exception, and mitigating circumstances must be given due consideration and death sentence can be awarded only in the `rarest of rare cases' and for special reasons to be recorded.\"" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "675bfe2bbb534540838d405f1d63ac44", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 35494, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 35072, "text": "In the decision reported in 2012(4) SCC 289, supra, the Apex Court has held that by drawing balance sheet of aggravating and mitigating circumstances and examining them in the light of facts and circumstances of the case, concluded that this was not a case where extreme penalty of death be imposed upon the accused and therefore, death sentence awarded to the accused was commuted to one of life imprisonment of 21 years." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "1c5d6b5cee1048b1bf015e12b3a10fc5", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 35653, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 35495, "text": "In the above-said case i.e., Brijendrasingh's case, the Apex Court has given the cases falling under the category of aggravating and mitigating circumstances." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "2edfcd9319014d8fb9067be04f0e1e8d", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 35809, "labels": [ "PRE_RELIED" ], "start": 35654, "text": "The Apex Court has laid down the principles to determine whether this case falls within the scope of rarest of rare cases for imposition of death sentence." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "5a0ccf7e44834431a8a7dced18c40d20", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 36609, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 35809, "text": "\nThe principles laid down by the Apex Court are as under: \" (i) The Court has to apply the test to determine, if it was the 'rarest of rare' case for imposition of a death sentence; (i) In the opinion of the court, imposition of any other punishment i.e., life imprisonment would be completely inadequate and would not meet the ends of justice; (ii) Life imprisonment is the rule and death sentence is an exception; (iii) The option to impose sentence of imprisonment for life cannot be cautiously exercised having regard to the nature and circumstances of the crime and all relevant circumstances; and (iv) The method (planned or otherwise) and the manner (extent of brutality and inhumanity, etc.) in which the crime was committed and the circumstances leading to commission of such heinous crime.\"" } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "844c5b1e1c5449aebb319b162696f019", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 36733, "labels": [ "RATIO" ], "start": 36609, "text": "\n 21. Accused Nos.1 to 6 and 8 are aged between 18 and 38 years; whereas Accused Nos.7 and 9 are aged about 51 and 53 years." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "14e0a5bc1f854f6bba446722d5cd73b6", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 36935, "labels": [ "RATIO" ], "start": 36734, "text": "Keeping in view the above principles laid down by the Apex Court, we are of the considered view that death sentence awarded by the trial court is contrary to the principles laid down by the Apex Court." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "359b3aa42d96478188f749bc18ca851a", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 37024, "labels": [ "ANALYSIS" ], "start": 36935, "text": "\n 22. Accordingly we answer the points for consideration partly in favour of the accused." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "0c7aebe78f7a4b7285febf257a673075", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 37088, "labels": [ "RPC" ], "start": 37024, "text": "\n 23. For the foregoing reasons, we pass the following order: I." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "905e355d13e949f7be6a3764b4f9d34a", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 37143, "labels": [ "RPC" ], "start": 37089, "text": "Reference case in Crl. R.C. No 11 of 2009 is rejected." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "7d0da703ac0e4ae185f36992f2d81314", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 37228, "labels": [ "RPC" ], "start": 37145, "text": "II. Appeal in Crl. A. No. 2516 of 2009 filed by accused No.1, 4 to 6, 8, 9 and Crl." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "7f040057c4c241a6a942827e4ed5f4dd", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 37293, "labels": [ "RPC" ], "start": 37229, "text": "A No. 2535 of 2009 filed by Accused No.2, 3, and 7 are rejected." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "79f8e0ed283e4eca90c0eaaccf6c7bf1", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 37705, "labels": [ "RPC" ], "start": 37295, "text": "III. Appeal in Crl. A. No.2516 of 2009 filed by Accused No.11,12 and 13 and Crl.A.No.2536 of 2009 filed by Accused No.14 and 15 are allowed and the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence recorded against them (accused No11 to 15) are set aside and they are acquitted of the offences alleged against them and they shall be set at liberty forthwith, if their presence is not required in any other case; IV." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "bd02d54f686b4189834977595864aa19", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 37954, "labels": [ "RPC" ], "start": 37706, "text": "The impugned order of conviction recorded by the trial court as against the Accused Nos.1 to 10 for the offence punishable under Section 114, 143, 147, 148, 307 (on two counts), 504, 506, 302 r/w Section 149 of IPC, on four counts, is confirmed; V." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "79533112f45d4ea288990d6103199ecd", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 38143, "labels": [ "RPC" ], "start": 37955, "text": "The impugned order of sentence made against Accused Nos.1 to 10 for offences punishable under Section 114,143,147,148, 307 (on two counts), 504,506 read with section 149 is also confirmed." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "f941fbdcab164a1895cd790d4a6b683d", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 38439, "labels": [ "RPC" ], "start": 38145, "text": "VI. Accused Nos.1 to 10 are sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life (21 years) and pay fine of `10,000/- each, on four counts, in default in payment of fine, to undergo imprisonment for a period of one year, for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 114/149 of IPC; VII." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "16f4870c8596427992d4fde3ee4089cd", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 38493, "labels": [ "RPC" ], "start": 38440, "text": "All the substantive sentences shall run concurrently." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "c69e961c8e17424a9f3d8e8ad20f8d15", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 38500, "labels": [ "RPC" ], "start": 38493, "text": "\n VIII." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "99aeafc45be74428b02b1318f9d030d7", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 38611, "labels": [ "RPC" ], "start": 38501, "text": "Accused are entitled for set-off of the period of detention undergone by them under section 428 of Cr.P C.\n X." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "223cc432842542e6a7486a3ad7c0b786", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 38903, "labels": [ "RPC" ], "start": 38612, "text": "If the fine amount is recovered, a sum of `50,000/- shall be paid to P.W.1 towards the death of his wife; whereas a sum of `50,000/- shall be paid to the spouse of deceased Siddalingappa, Nagappa and Mallappa or their legal representatives, as the case may be, respectively, as compensation." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "03291b632c1148fda32b5b5ce434cd71", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 38983, "labels": [ "RPC" ], "start": 38903, "text": "\n XI. Accordingly the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence are modified." } }, { "from_name": null, "id": "2964ac9275ee4a2387b556740bc4a9a7", "to_name": null, "type": null, "value": { "end": 39010, "labels": [ "NONE" ], "start": 38983, "text": "\n Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE Bjs" } } ] } ]

{ "text": " IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA \n\n CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD\n\n DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY 2013\n PRESENT\n\nTHE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K. BHAKTHAVATSALA\n\n AND\nTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.SREENIVASE GOWDA\n\n CRIMINAL R C No.11/2009\n C/W\n\nCRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.2516/2009 C/W 2535/2009\n\n C/W 2536/2009\n\nBETWEEN\n\n CRL. R.C. NO.11/2009\n\nHigh Court of Karnataka, Petitioner\nRep. By Additional Registrar General,\nHigh Court Circuit Bench,\nDharwad.\n\n(By Sri V M Banakar, Addl. SPP, for petitioner)\n\nAND\n\n1. Sri Sundresh,\nS/o Basavanneppa Udikeri,\nAge: 22 years.\n\n2. Sri Siddappa Chandranaik\nRevannavar,\nAge: 28 years.\n\n3. Sidlingappa @ Mudakappa,\nS/o Chandranaik Revannavar,\nAge: 26 years.\n\n4. Kalmesh Shankreppa Udkeri,\nAge: 23 years.\n\n5. Rajshekhar @ Gangappa Udkeri,\nS/o Chanbasappa Udkeri,\nAge: 40 years.\n\n6. Bhagwant Nagappa Udkeri,\nAge: 32 years.\n\n7. Chandranaik Mallanaik\nRevennavar,\nAge: 53 years.\n\n8. Irappa Basavenneppa Udkeri,\nAge: 20 years.\n\n9. Shankreppa Chanabasappa Udkeri,\nAge: 55 years.\n\nAll appellants are Respondents\nResiding at Murkibhavi,\nTq. Bailhongal,\nDist: Belgaum.\n\n(By Sri R B Naik, Sr. Counsel, for Smt. Vijetha R Naik\n & J Basavaraj, Adv., for respondents 1,4 to 6, 8 and 9)\n\n(By Sri Mallikarjun S Masali, Adv., for R-2,3 and 7)\n\n\n This Crl. R C is filed under Section 366 of the Code of\nCriminal Procedure, for confirmation of death sentence\nawarded to accused Nos.1 to 9 by the Presiding Officer, Fast\nTrack Court-II & Addl. Sessions Judge, Belgaum vide\njudgment of conviction dated 4/16.12.2008 in S C\nNo.28/2006.\n\n CRL.A. NO.2516/2009\n\n1. Sri Sundresh,\nS/o Basavanneppa Udikeri,\nAge: 22 years.\n\n2. Sri Kalmesh,\nS/o Shankareppa Udikeri,\nAge: 23 years.\n\n3. Sri Rajshekhar @ Gangappa,\nS/o Chandranaik Revannavar,\nAge: 40 years.\n\n4. Sri Bhagwant,\nS/o Nagappa Udikeri,\nAge: 32 years.\n\n5. Sri Irappa,\nS/o Basavaneppa Udikeri,\nAge: 20 years.\n\n6. Sri Shankreppa,\nA/o Chanbasappa Udikeri,\nAge: 55 years.\n\n7. Smt. Gourawwa,\nW/o Nagappa Udikeri,\nAge: 47 years.\n\n8. Sri Basavanneppa,\nS/o Chanbasappa Udikeri,\nAge: 58 years.\n\n9. Sri Nagappa,\nS/o Chanbasappa Udikeri,\nAge: 57 years.\n\nAll appellants are Appellants\nResiding at Murkibhavi,\nTq. Bailhongal,\nDist: Belgaum.\n\n(By Sri R B Naik, Sr. Counsel, for Smt. Vijetha R Naik\n & J Basavaraj, Adv., for appellants)\n\nAND\n\nThe State of Karnataka\n\n(Through Nesargi Police Station),\n\nRepresented by its\n\nState Public Prosecutor,\n\nHigh Court of Karnataka,\n\nBangalore. Respondent\n\n(By Sri V M Banakar, Addl. SPP, for respondent)\n\n Criminal Appeal No.2516/2009 is filed under Section\n374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying to set\n\naside the judgment and order of conviction and sentence\nrecorded by the Fast Track-II and Addl. Sessions Judge,\nBelgaum, in S C No.28/2006 by its order of conviction dated\n4.12.2008 and sentence dated 16.12.2008.\n\n CRL.A. NO.2535/2009\n\n1. Siddappa Revannavar,\nS/o Chandrakant Revannavar,\nAge: 28 years.\n\n2. Sidlingappa @ Mudakappa Revannavar,\nS/o Chandrakant Revannavar,\nAge: 26 years.\n\n3. Chandranaik Revannavar,\nS/o Mallanaik Revannavar,\nAge: 53 years.\n\nAll the appellants are residing at Appellants\nMurkibhavi, Tq. Bailhongal,\nDist. Belgaum.\n\n(By Sri Mallikarjun S Masali & C H Jadhav, Advs., for\n appellants)\n\nAND\n\nThe State of Karnataka Respondent\nBy Nesargi Police Station,\nRepresented by its\nState Public Prosecutor,\nHigh Court of Karnataka,\nBangalore.\n\n(By Sri V M Banakar, Addl. SPP)\n\n\n Criminal Appeal No.2535/2009 is filed under Section\n374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying to set\naside the judgment and order of conviction and sentence\nrecorded by the Fast Track-II and Addl. Sessions Judge,\nBelgaum, in S C No.28/2006 by its order of conviction dated\n4.12.2008 and sentence dated 16.12.2008.\n\n CRL.A. NO.2536/2009\n\n1. Mallawwa Chandranaik Revannavar,\nW/o Chandranaik Revannavar,\nAge: 47 years.\n\n2. Sakranaik Revennavar,\nS/o Mallanaik Revannavar,\nAge: 54 years.\n\n3. Doddanaik Revannavar,\nS/o Mallanaik Revennavar,\nAge: 50 years.\n\nAll the appellants are residing at\nMurkibhavi,\n\nTq. Bailhongal, Appellants\nDist: Belgaum.\n\n(By Sri Mallikarjun S Masali & C H Jadhav, Advs., for\nappellants)\n\nAND\n\nThe State of Karnataka Respondent\nBy Nesargi Police Station,\nRepresented by its\nState Public Prosecutor,\nHigh Court of Karnataka,\nBangalore.\n\n(By Sri V M Banakar, Addl. SPP)\n\n Criminal Appeal No.2536/2009 is filed under Section\n374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying to set\naside the judgment and order of conviction and sentence\nrecorded by the Fast Track-II and Addl. Sessions Judge,\nBelgaum, in S C No.28/2006 by its order of conviction dated\n4.12.2008 and sentence dated 16.12.2008.\n\n The Crl. R C and the Appeals coming on for hearing, the\nsame having been heard and reserved for pronouncement of\nJudgment, Dr. Bhakthavatsala, J., delivered the following:\n\n JUDGMENT\n By order dated 16.12.2008 made in SC No.28/2006, Fast Track Court-II/Addl. Sessions Judge at Belgaum, seeks confirmation of death sentence awarded against accused Nos.1 to 9 for the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, on four counts. It is registered under Section 366 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in Criminal R C No.11/2009.\n 2. Criminal Appeals in Nos.2516/2009, 2535/2009 and 2536/2009 have been filed by the accused Nos.1 to 15 challenging the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence passed against them for the various offences in the above-said case.\n 3. Since these cases arise out of the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 16.12.2008 made in SC No.28/2006 on the file of Fast Track Court at Belgaum, we have heard common arguments and proceeding to dispose off these cases by this common judgment.\n 4. For the purpose of convenience and better understanding, respondents Nos.1 to 9 in Crl. RC No.11/2009 and appellants in Criminal Appeal Nos.2516/2009, 2535/2009 and 2536/2009 are hereinafter referred to as `Accused Nos.1 to 15' as arraigned before the trial Court.\n 5. Brief facts of the case leading to registering of the Reference Case under Section 366 of Cr. P C, may be stated as under: By the impugned judgment dated 16.12.2008, learned Sessions Judge convicted all the 15 accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 307, 302, 506, 504 read with section 149/114 of IPC. After hearing the accused on the point of sentence, Learned Sessions Judge has passed further judgment awarding death sentence as against accused Nos.1 to 9, for the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w Section 149 of IPC, on four counts. As required under sub-section (1) of Section 366 of Cr.PC, learned trial Judge has submitted the records for confirmation of Death sentence.\n 6. Brief facts of the case leading to the filing of other three Appeals by the accused Nos.1 to 15 under Section 374(2) of Cr.P C may be stated as under: The complainant-Suresh Siddappa Wodeyar (PW-1) and his family members are permanent residents of Murkibhavi village in Bailhongal Taluk. The complainant's father has 7 brothers and all of them were residing together in the same place. Ulavappa (husband of P.W-3) is the elder brother of the complainant. It is stated that one and half years prior to 30.8.2005 ( i.e., the date of incident), when Kasturi-P.W3, had gone to Kumbarbhavi to fetch water, accused No.3/Sidlingappa and accused No.1/Sundresh picked up quarrel with her and poured water on her; she informed about the incident to her family members; they questioned the accused No.1/Sundresh and accused No.7/Chandranaik and their family members. For which, the accused quarreled with the complainant and his family members. It is also alleged that accused No.1/Sundresh and accused No.3/Sidlingappa were often teasing P.W.3 and blocking her way whenever she went to lands. It is alleged that accused No.10/Mallawwa (wife of accused No.7/Chandranaik) used to taunt and challenge the complainant's family members and threatened with dire consequences if they lodged a complaint with Police.\n Further case of the prosecution is that on 29.8.2005 (Monday), at about 8.00 a m, when the complainant was washing his bullocks, Accused No.10/Mallawwa and Accused No.2/Siddappa, who were standing on the upstairs of their house, picked up quarrel with the complainant-P.W.1 and threw chappal at him. He informed about the incident to his family members, for which they told him that a complaint would be lodged on the next day. On 30.8.2005 (Tuesday) at about 6.30 AM, when the complainant-P.W1 was going to answer nature's call, Accused No.10/Mallawwa instigated the Accused to kill the complainant-P.W.1. Accordingly, Accused No.1/Sundresh, Accused No.2/Siddappa, Accused No.3/Sidlingappa, Accused No.4/Kalmesh, Accused No.5/Rajshekhar, Accused No.6/Bhagwant and one Shivappa Chanbasappa Udkeri, Rudrappa Shankrappa Udkeri, Sidlingappa Apanna Konnennawar, Accused No.15/Doddanaik, Accused No.14/Sakranaik, Raju Sidlingappa Konnennawar, Accused No.12/Basavanneppa and Accused No.7/Chandranaik chased the complainant-P.W.1, who raised hue and cry and went inside his house; at that time, the complainant's grand father/Siddlingappa (the deceased) and his deceased uncles Mallappa and Nagappa, who are residents of the same lane, came and complainant's wife-Ratnawwa also came out of the house holding a plastic mug to go for nature's call; she requested the Accused not to do anything to her husband(PW- 1). But on the other hand Accused No.2 assaulted Ratnawwa with kyota on left side of her chest and left arm. Seeing the incident, grand father and uncles of the complaint were proceeding towards Police Station to lodge a complaint, but the Accused accosted them and assaulted and also threatened the public with dire consequences, if they intervened in their action. Thus, the Accused assaulted Siddlingappa, Mallappa and Nagappa (grand father and uncles of the complainant) with koyta, axe, sickle, jambia, stick and stone. PW-1 lodged a complaint with Nesargi Police Station. The Police registered a case in Crime No.72/2005 on 30.8.2005 at about 8.15 A.M., for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302, 109 and 506 r/w section 149 of IPC. During the course of investigation, panchanamas were conducted. Accused were arrested and recorded their voluntary statement and seized the incriminating articles. After the investigation was over, charge sheet came to be laid against the Accused for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 307, 302, 114, 506 and 504 r/w Section 149 of IPC. Since the offence under Sections 307 and 302 of IPC are exclusively triable by a Court of Sessions, the case was committed to Sessions Court, where it was registered as SC No.28/2006. The trial Court, after hearing arguments, framed charges against all the 15 persons for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302, 307, 114, 506, 504 read with Section 149 of IPC.\nAccused have pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution went to trial by examining as many as 48 witnesses and got marked 66 documents and 38 Material Objects. The defence has got marked a portion of complaint- Ext.P-1 as Ext.D1 and D2. Statement of the Accused under Section 313 of Cr.PC was recorded. Accused have denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing in the evidence of prosecution witnesses. They have not adduced any defence evidence. The trial Court, after hearing arguments, perusing oral and documentary evidence on record, came to a conclusion that the prosecution brought home the guilt to the Accused for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302, 307, 114, 506, 504 read with section 149 of IPC.\nAfter hearing the accused, on the point of sentence, held that the case falls within the scope of `rarest of the rare case' and awarded death sentence to Accused Nos.1 to 9 for the offence under Section 302 of IPC, on four counts.\n Further, Accused Nos.1 to 15 were sentenced to undergo- (i) imprisonment for 3 months and pay fine of `5,000/- each, in default in payment of fine, to undergo imprisonment for 2 months for the offence under Section 143 of IPC; (ii) imprisonment for 6 months and pay fine of `5,000/- each, in default in payment of fine, to undergo imprisonment for 3 months for the offence under Section 147 of IPC; (iii) imprisonment for 9 months and pay fine of `6,000/- each, in default in payment of fine to undergo imprisonment for 4 months for the offence under Section 148 of IPC; and (iv) imprisonment for a period of 10 years and pay fine of `10,000/- each, in default in payment of fine, to undergo imprisonment for 2 years for the offence under Section 307 of IPC (i.e., attempt to commit murder of P.W1-Suresh and P.W5- Maruthi; Further, Accused Nos.10 to 15 were sentenced to undergo - (a) imprisonment for life and pay fine of `10,000/- each, in default in payment of fine to undergo imprisonment for 3 years for the offence under Section 114 of IPC; (b) Imprisonment for 2 years for the offence punishable under Section 506 of IPC; and (c) to pay fine of `1,000/- each, in default in payment of fine, imprisonment for 2 months for the offence punishable under Section 504 of IPC.\n The trial court has ordered that the substantive sentences shall run one after another.\nThis is impugned in these Appeals.\n 7. Sri V M Banakar, learned Addl. SPP appearing for the state, submitted that since four persons were brutally murdered with deadly weapons, the trial Court has rightly classified the case as \"rarest of rare cases\" and awarded death sentence as against Accused Nos.1 to 9 and the same may be confirmed. He also submitted that the trial Court, on proper appreciation of oral and documentary evidence placed on record, rightly reached the conclusion that the prosecution has proved the guilt to the accused for the charges levelled against them and awarded adequate sentence for the offences and there is no merit in the Appeals filed by the Accused and the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence. He has cited a decision reported in (2010) 1 SCC (CRI) 925 (DILIP PREMNARAYAN TIWARI AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA) on the point of appreciation of evidence in so for as the discrepancies/omissions in FIR.\n 8. Sri R B Naik, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Sri Basavaraj, for Accused Nos.1, 4 to 6,8,9,11,12 and 13, submitted that the trial Court erred in convicting the Accused solely on the basis of interested testimony of the witnesses, though all independent eye witnesses have turned hostile to prosecution. He further submits that though, the alleged eye witnesses, have not witnessed the incident, the trial Court erred in accepting their evidence as gospel truth to base conviction for the offences alleged against the accused. He further submitted that the case on hand cannot be treated as a `rarest of rare cases' to award death sentence. He prayed that the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence awarded against the Accused may be set aside and the all the accused may acquitted of the offences alleged them. He has cited the following decisions: (i) AIR 1958 SC 935 (PURANMAL AGARWALLA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA) on the point that the offender shall not be punished with a more severe punishment than the Court which tries him could award for any one of such offences; (ii) (1988) 4 SCC 183 (MOHD. AKHTAR HUSSAIN ALIAS IBRAHIM AHMED BHATTI Vs.\n ASSISTANT COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS(PREVENTION), AHMEDABAD AND ANOTHER) on the point that the Courts must take into consideration the usual factors while imposing sentences; and (iii) (2010) 1 SCC 573 (RAMRAJ ALIAS NANHOO ALIAS BIHNU Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH) on the point that imprisonment for life sentence was substituted for death sentence.\n 9. Sri Masali, learned Counsel appearing for Accused Nos.2,3 and 7, 10,14 and 15, adopted the arguments of the learned Senior Counsel, Sri Ravi B Naik. He relied upon the following decisions: (i) 2003(7) SCC 141 (RAM PAL Vs. STATE OF U.P.) on the point that in the case of multiple murder, death sentence was altered to imprisonment for life.\n (ii) 2011(10) SCC 389 (SHAM Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA on the point that death sentence was commuted to life imprisonment; (iii) 2011(13) SCC 706 (RAJESH KUMAR Vs.\n STATE) on the point of mitigating circumstances relating to death penalty; (iv) 2012(4) SCC 289 (BRAJENDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF M.P) on the point of mental imbalance of the Accused at the time of committing crime and gravity of mitigating circumstances while awarding death sentence.\n 10. In the light of the arguments addressed by the learned Counsels for the parties, we formulate the following points for our consideration: (i) Whether the trial Court is justified in convicting Accused Nos.1 to 15 for the offences punishable under Sections 114, 143, 147, 148, 307, 302, 506 and 504 r/w 149 of I P C ?\n (ii) Whether the trial Court is justified in awarding death sentence as against accused Nos.1 to 9 for the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w Section 149 of IPC?\n (iii) Whether the impugned order of sentence passed as against accused Nos.1 to 9 for the offences punishable under Sections 114, 143, 147, 148, 307, 504, 506 r/w Section 149 of IPC calls for interference by this Court ?\n (iv) Whether the impugned order of sentence passed as against accused Nos.10 to 15 for the offences punishable under Sections 114, 143, 147, 148, 307, 302, 506 and 504 r/w149 of IPC calls for interference by this Court ?\n (v)What order?\n 11. For the purpose of convenience and better understanding, we proceed to take up points (i) to (iv) together for consideration.\n 12. At the very outset, it must be mentioned that the alleged independent eye witnesses - P.Ws.6 to 15, 20 to 24 have not supported the case of prosecution. Mahazar Witnesses namely PW-16 /Subhash Honnanaik Patil, P.W- 17/Laxman Gangappa Naik, P.W18/Mallesh Basavanneppa Karennavar, P.W19/Nagappa Adeveppa Patteda, P.W27/Mallanaik Sanganaik Baganavar and P.W31/Honappa Yallappa Sattennavar also did not support the case of prosecution. P.W30 inquest mahazar witness has partly turned hostile to prosecution. The witnesses, who have supported the case of prosecution, can be described as under: (i) P.W.1the Complainant and P.Ws.2 to 5 and 32 are eye witnesses; (ii) P.Ws.25 and 26 are the inquest mahazar witnesses with regard to the deceased-Ratnavva; (iii) P.W.28 is the inquest mahazar witness with regard to the deceased- Siddlingappa; (iv) P.W29/Pundalik Bhimappa Wadeyar is the inquest mahazar witness with regard to the deceased Nagappa; (v) P.W33-Raju Nesargi is a seizure mahazar witness regarding seizure of motor cycle at the instance of Accused No.2 and Accused No.6; regarding seizure of an axe at the instance of Accused No.6 and two longs at the instance of Accused No2 (vi) P.Ws-13,38, P.Ws.40,41,45 and 48, are Police personnel who assisted the investing officers during investigation; (vii) 24 (viii) P.W-39/Ganapati is the PSI, who (ix) registered the case in Crime (x) No.72/2005 of Nesargi Police Station and submitted FIR (Ex.P40); P.W-44/Sharanappa and P.W47/Sonia Narang are the Investigating Officers; P.W-42/Dr. Pushpa H R-lady Medical Officer, who conducted autopsy over the deceased Ratnavva; and P.W.43/Dr.M.S.Hottigimatt is the Medical Officer who conducted autopsy over three the deceased persons namely, Siddalingappa, Nagappa and Mallappa.\n 13. The bone of contention of the defence is that as all the independent eye witnesses have not supported the case of prosecution, the trial Court erred in convicting the accused for the alleged offences solely on the basis of interested testimony of the witnesses who are related to deceased and the complainant. It is also contended that FIR was registered against 16 persons, but the Investigating Officer, has given up the accused viz., Accused Nos.7/Shivappa Chanabasappa Udakeri, Accused No.10/Raju Siddalingappa Konnanavar and Accused No.13/Siddalingappa Appanna Konnanavar mentioned in the FIR, and filed charge sheet adding three other persons, viz., accused No.9/Shankreppa Chanabasappa Udkeri, Accused No.11/Gowrawwa Nagappa Udkeri and accused No.13/Nagappa Chanabasappa Udkeri. It is also contended that in the FIR, there was no allegation against accused No.8/Irappa.\n 14. Now, we proceed to state as to relationship of the Accused among them and their age at the time of incident.\nAccused No.7/Chandranaik and his wife-accused No.10/Mallawwa were residing in the house nearby to the complainant. Accused No.2/Siddappa and Accused No.3/Sidlingappa are the children of Accused Nos.7 and 10.\n Accused No.14/Sakranaik and Accused No.15/Doddanaik are the younger brothers of Accused No.7. Accused No.13/Nagappa is the husband of Accused No.11/Gourawwa.\nAccused No.5/Rajshekhar, Accused No.9/Shankreppa and Accused No.12/Basavaneppa are brothers. Accused No.1/Sundresh and Accused No.8/Irappa are the sons of Accused No.12/Basavaneppa. Accused No.6/Bhagwant is the son of Accused No.13/Nagappa. Accused No.4/Kalmesh is the son of Accused No.9/Shankreppa. Accused No.10/Mallawwa is the sister of Accused No.5/Rajshekhar, Accused No.9/Shankreppa, Accused No.12/Basavanneppa and Accused No.13/Nagappa. Accused Nos.1 to 9 are aged about 28 years, 26 years, 24 years, 21 years, 38 years, 30 years, 51 years, 18 years and 53 years, respectively.\n 15. According to the case of prosecution, Accused No.1/Sundresh, Accused No.2/Siddappa, Accused No.5/Rajshekhar and 11/Gowravva were armed with axe. It is pertinent to mention that the weapon 'long' is called as 'kyota' in Kannada. 27 Accused No.3/Siddlingappa, Accused No.4/Kalmesh and Accused No.7/Chandranaik were armed with 'long'/'koyta. The alleged abettors namely Accused Nos.10 to 15 are aged about 44, 45, 56, 52, 57 and 48 years, respectively.\n 16. From the evidence of P.Ws.1,2,3,4,5 and 32, Accused No.1/Sundresh assaulted Ratnavva, Mallappa and Nagappa with an axe; Accused No.2 assaulted Ratnavva and Nagappa with a 'long'/koitha; Accused No.3 assaulted Siddlingappa and Mallappa with a 'long/koitha'; Accused No.4 assaulted Siddalingappa on the neck with a koitha/long; Accused No.5 assaulted Mallappa on the shoulder with an axe; Accused No.6 assaulted Nagappa on the head and back with an axe; Accused No.7 assaulted Mallappa on the face with a koyta/long; Accused No.8 assaulted Siddalingappa on the shoulder with an axe and Accused No.9 assaulted Ratnavva with an axe on the left hand and Siddalingappa on the left shoulder. It is in the evidence of the complainant/P.Ws.1, P.Ws.2,3,4,5 and 32 that Accused No.10/Mallawwa (wife of Accused No.7) abetted the commission of offence and also assaulted Siddalingappa on his forehead with a stone.\nFurther, A-11 to 15 instigated the accused kill PW.1-Suresh and PW.5-Maruthi. Charge sheet reveals that accused named in FIR namely Accused No.7/Shivappa Chanabasappa Udakeri, Accused No.10/Raju Siddalingappa Konnanavar and Accused No.13/Siddalingappa Appanna Konnanavar were given up while adding Accused No.9/Shankreppa Chanabasappa Udkeri, Accused No.11/Gourawwa Nagappa Udkeri and Accused No.13/Nagappa Chanabasappa Udkeri in the charge sheet.\nAccused Nos.9,12 and 13 are brothers. All the independent eye witnesses, viz., P.Ws.6 to 15, P.Ws.20 to 24 have not supported the case of prosecution for the reasons best known to them. Merely because those witnesses have not deposed in support of the prosecution, case of the prosecution cannot be rejected in toto. Therefore,the evidence of P.Ws.1, 2,3,4,5 and 32, who are the eye witnesses cum related to the complainant require to be scrutinized carefully. In our view, there is no strong ground to reject their evidence in toto for the following reasons.\n 17. P.W1-Suresh, aged about 28 years, is the husband of the deceased-Ratnavva and grand son of the deceased Siddalingappa and nephew of the deceased Nagappa and Mallappa. He has deposed in evidence that the deceased Siddalingappa had 8 sons and 2 daughters. P.W-1 has deposed that his father-Siddappa died about 14 years back prior to the incident and his senior uncle-Basappa and his father though living in the same house of Siddalingappa, they had separate mess; whereas other 6 sons including the deceased Mallappa and Nagappa were living together with Siddalingappa and they had a common mess.\nP.W2/Bhagawwa N Wadeyar is the sister of P.W1. Ulavappa Siddappa Wadeyar is the elder brother of P.W1. According to P.W-1, about 1 year prior to the incident, when P.W3/Kasturi (w/o P.W1's elder brother-Ulavappa Siddappa Wadeyar) had been to fetch water, Accused Nos.1 and 3 poured water and pulled her. She informed about the incident to her family members including deceased persons; they enquired with the Accused. Since then, Accused No.10/Mallawwa used to abuse the family members of the complainant, in vulgar language, whenever they went in front of her house; when P.W3/Kasturi was proceeding towards the land; Accused Nos.1 and 3 teased and abused her in vulgar language and also restrained her from proceeding further.\n She informed the incident to the family members. When they questioned the Accused, there was exchange of words. Again on 29.8.2005, at about 8.00 am, when the complainant was washing bullocks in front of his house, Accused No.10/Mallawwa, who was standing on the staircase of her house, teased him and threw slipper at him. Accused No.10 and Accused No.2 threatened him with dire consequences.\n Again, on 30.8.2005, at about 7.00 a m, when the complainant was going to attend nature's call, Accused Nos.1 to 9 were armed with long and axes etc., came along with other accused namely Accused Nos.10,11,12,13,14 and 15 and challenged the complainant and his family members and attempted to kill the complainant and his family members. It is the case of the prosecution that on 30.8.2005 at about 6.30 a.m., all the Accused started chasing the complainant; he made hue and cry and went in side his house. On hearing the hue and cry of Pw-1, his wife Ratnavva came to the entrance of their house and requested the Accused not to assault her husband-P.W.1, but Accused Nos.1, 2 and 9 assaulted her and killed at the entrance of her house. P.W1 has deposed that he was hearing and also watching the scene from inside the house. Thereafter, his grand father/Siddalingappa and uncles- Mallappa and Nagappa were proceeding towards Police Station to lodge a complain against the Accused and at that time Accused Nos.1 and 5 assaulted his uncle-Mallappa with axe and Accused Nos.3 and 7 with Koitha; Accused Nos.3 and 4 assaulted his grand father/Siddalingappa with koitha; whereas Accused Nos.8 and 9 assaulted Siddalingappa with an axe and Accused No.10 assaulted Siddalingappa with stone; his uncle- Nagappa was assaulted by Accused Nos.1 and 6 with an axe and Accused No.2 with long and within half an hour, the Accused killed four persons viz., his wife, uncles and grand father. It is in his evidence that after assaulting his wife Ratnavva, grandfather-Siddlingappa, uncles Nagappa and Mallappa, all the accused chased him and PW-5 Maruthi with an intention to kill them. PW.5-Maruthi escaped through Mallari Oni whereas he (PW-1) ran away from the village; 15 minutes later came to the spot and saw dead body of his wife, grandfather and uncles The evidence of P.W-1/complainant is corroborated by eye witnesses viz., P.W1's sister- P.W2/Bhagawwa N Wadeyar; P.W-1's elder brother's wife/P.W-4-Balawwa; his sister-in-law/P.W3-Kasturi N Wadeyar and his uncles P.W5/Maruti S Wadeyar and P.W- 32/Basappa S Wadeyar.\n 18. Now, we refer to the evidence of the Investigating Officer-Smt.Sonia Narang-PW.47 who was the Assistant Superintendent of Police at Bailhongal. It is in her evidence that on 2.9.2005, she took up further investigation and the Circle Inspector of Police at Bailhongal produced accused Nos.1 and 4 before her with a report and she arrested them and they gave voluntary statement as per Ext.P.62 and 63, respectively and produced a Scooter bearing No.KA 24/E 1908, which was used by the accused for escaping from the scene of crime. She seized the said Scooter under a panchanama in the presence of P.Ws.16 and 17 as per Ex.P12.\nFurther, she has seized axe (M.O-12), blue colour shirt (M.O- 47) and while lungi (M.O-48) at instance of Accused No.1 under a panchanama in the presence of the above-said panchas. Likewise she has seized one long (M.O-19), shirt (M.O-50) and black and yellow checks lungi (M.O-51) at the instance of Accused NO4, under a panchayama (Ex.P-13). She has further deposed that the CPI, Bailhongal, produced three accused persons viz., accused No.7/Chandranaik, accused No.3/Siddalingappa @ Mudakappa and accused No.5/Rajashekhar @ Gangappa before her on 10.9.2005 along with a report as per Ex.P-61. She has recorded voluntary statement of Accused NO.5 and accused No.7 as per Ex.P65; Ex.P66 respectively and recovered their clothes worn at the time of incident and weapons used in the commission of crime. She has deposed that on 16.9.2005, the ASI produced accused No.13/Nagappa Udakeri before her and she interrogated and produced him before the court for remand.\nShe received post mortem report. She has sent 47 sealed articles to FSL, Belgaum for chemical examination and filed charge sheet on 8.3.2006. The FSL report has been marked as Ex.P57. IN the cross-examination of P.W-47, she has deposed that since the complainant himself gave further statement stating that the other accused mentioned in the FIR did not commit any offence, they were given up. Nothing worthwhile is elicited in her cross-examination with regard to the evidence given before the trial Court. Ex.P-47/FSL report reveals that 47 articles were subjected to chemical analysis and all the articles except two articles viz., sample mud and lungi were stained with blood. Serology report has not been produced.\nEx.P.51-rough sketch of scene of crime, shows the place of crime and the place where the dead bodies were lying. All the star witnesses were cross-examined by the defence at length by learned counsel for the accused, but nothing worth while was elicited to disbelieve their oral evidence as to the role of the accused in the commission of crime. There is no major omissions and contradictions elicited in the cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses.\n 19. It is the case of prosecution that the Accused persons are powerful members of the community in the village and the independent witnesses have not supported the case of prosecution fearing the accused. It is alleged that Accused No.10 threw chappal at the complainant and instigated the Accused persons to kill the complainant and his family members and also assaulted on the fore head of the deceased Siddalingappa with a stone. It is a fact that wife of P.W.1 was killed by the said accused in front of her house and when Siddalingappa along with his two sons-Mallappa and Nagappa were proceeding through Asundi Oni to Police Station, to lodge a complaint, the Accused persons chased them and killed and the dead bodies were lying in the same lane one after another.\nThe dead bodies lying on the street can be seen in the photographs at Exs.P26 to 29, taken at the scene of crime.\nThough there is no mention in the complaint about the overt acts by Accused No.8, the evidence of the eye witnesses is sufficient to hold that all nine accused ( namely Nos.1 to 9), in pursuance of the common object and at the instigation of Accused No.10/Mallawwa, they have killed Ratnavva, Siddalingappa, Nagappa and Mallappa, within half an hour.\nNo doubt the name of Accused No.9/Shankreppa does not find a place in the FIR, but during the course of recording statement of the witnesses, he was arrested and according to the evidence of eye witnesses, Accused No.9 assaulted Ratnavva and Nagappa with an axe. The contention of the learned counsel for the accused that Accused No.9 was falsely implicated in the case falls to the ground. The prosecution has proved that all the above said four persons died an homicidal death. Evidence on record is sufficient to hold that Accused Nos.1 to 10, with a common object, Rantnavva, Siddalingappa, Mallappa and Nagappa were killed and also attempted to kill PW.1-Suresh and PW.5-Maruthi and hence the order of conviction recorded by the trial court for the offence punishable under section 302 (on four counts) and 307 (on two counts) read with section 149 of IPC, does not call for our interference. The evidence of the prosecution that accused No.11 to 15 abetted the crime is not sufficient to base conviction in the absence of cogent and satisfactory evidence and they are entitled for an order of an acquittal for all the offences alleged against them.\n 20. The trial Court has classified the case of murder as 'rarest of rare cases' and awarded death sentence to Accused Nos.1 to 9. Brutality is involved in every murder case.\nNumber of murders cannot be a ground to award death sentence. The facts to be considered for awarding death sentence are the magnitude and the manner and brutality. In the decision reported in 2003(7) SCC 141, supra, the Apex Court has held that \"It is true that the incident in question has prematurely terminated the life of twenty-one people and the number of deaths cannot be the sole criterion for awarding the maximum punishment of death.\" In the decision reported in (2011)10 SCC 389, supra, Apex Court has held that the appellant/Accused would not be a menace to society and no reason to believe that the appellant cannot be reformed or rehabilitated or would constitute a continued threat to society and it is not the `rarest of the rare case' causing for extreme penalty of death. In the decision reported in (2011)13 SCC 706, supra, the Apex Court has held that murder committed in a very brutal and inhuman fashion alone cannot justify death sentence and in the absence of any evidence to show that the appellant was a continuing threat to society or was beyond reform and rehabilitation, death sentence cannot be sustained.\nIn the case of Bachan Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in (1980)2 SCC 684, the Constitution Bench of the Apex Court has held that \"for a person convicted of murder, life imprisonment is the rule and death sentence is an exception, and mitigating circumstances must be given due consideration and death sentence can be awarded only in the `rarest of rare cases' and for special reasons to be recorded.\" In the decision reported in 2012(4) SCC 289, supra, the Apex Court has held that by drawing balance sheet of aggravating and mitigating circumstances and examining them in the light of facts and circumstances of the case, concluded that this was not a case where extreme penalty of death be imposed upon the accused and therefore, death sentence awarded to the accused was commuted to one of life imprisonment of 21 years. In the above-said case i.e., Brijendrasingh's case, the Apex Court has given the cases falling under the category of aggravating and mitigating circumstances. The Apex Court has laid down the principles to determine whether this case falls within the scope of rarest of rare cases for imposition of death sentence.\nThe principles laid down by the Apex Court are as under: \" (i) The Court has to apply the test to determine, if it was the 'rarest of rare' case for imposition of a death sentence; (i) In the opinion of the court, imposition of any other punishment i.e., life imprisonment would be completely inadequate and would not meet the ends of justice; (ii) Life imprisonment is the rule and death sentence is an exception; (iii) The option to impose sentence of imprisonment for life cannot be cautiously exercised having regard to the nature and circumstances of the crime and all relevant circumstances; and (iv) The method (planned or otherwise) and the manner (extent of brutality and inhumanity, etc.) in which the crime was committed and the circumstances leading to commission of such heinous crime.\"\n 21. Accused Nos.1 to 6 and 8 are aged between 18 and 38 years; whereas Accused Nos.7 and 9 are aged about 51 and 53 years. Keeping in view the above principles laid down by the Apex Court, we are of the considered view that death sentence awarded by the trial court is contrary to the principles laid down by the Apex Court.\n 22. Accordingly we answer the points for consideration partly in favour of the accused.\n 23. For the foregoing reasons, we pass the following order: I. Reference case in Crl. R.C. No 11 of 2009 is rejected.\n II. Appeal in Crl. A. No. 2516 of 2009 filed by accused No.1, 4 to 6, 8, 9 and Crl. A No. 2535 of 2009 filed by Accused No.2, 3, and 7 are rejected.\n III. Appeal in Crl. A. No.2516 of 2009 filed by Accused No.11,12 and 13 and Crl.A.No.2536 of 2009 filed by Accused No.14 and 15 are allowed and the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence recorded against them (accused No11 to 15) are set aside and they are acquitted of the offences alleged against them and they shall be set at liberty forthwith, if their presence is not required in any other case; IV. The impugned order of conviction recorded by the trial court as against the Accused Nos.1 to 10 for the offence punishable under Section 114, 143, 147, 148, 307 (on two counts), 504, 506, 302 r/w Section 149 of IPC, on four counts, is confirmed; V. The impugned order of sentence made against Accused Nos.1 to 10 for offences punishable under Section 114,143,147,148, 307 (on two counts), 504,506 read with section 149 is also confirmed.\n VI. Accused Nos.1 to 10 are sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life (21 years) and pay fine of `10,000/- each, on four counts, in default in payment of fine, to undergo imprisonment for a period of one year, for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 114/149 of IPC; VII. All the substantive sentences shall run concurrently.\n VIII. Accused are entitled for set-off of the period of detention undergone by them under section 428 of Cr.P C.\n X. If the fine amount is recovered, a sum of `50,000/- shall be paid to P.W.1 towards the death of his wife; whereas a sum of `50,000/- shall be paid to the spouse of deceased Siddalingappa, Nagappa and Mallappa or their legal representatives, as the case may be, respectively, as compensation.\n XI. Accordingly the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence are modified.\n Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE Bjs " }

{ "group": "Tax" }

[{"result":[{"from_name":null,"id":"ec5e65782b1949e4a5445a2115ab5382","to_name":null,"type":null,"va(...TRUNCATED)

{"text":"PETITIONER:\nRAGHUBAR MANDAL HARIHAR MANDAL\n\nVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nTHE STATE OF BIHAR\n\nDA(...TRUNCATED)

{ "group": "Tax" }

[{"result":[{"from_name":"label","id":"7323f9247fbc4618bf006ef103d7cb3a","to_name":"text","type":"la(...TRUNCATED)

{"text":"PETITIONER:\nP.K. BADIANI\n\n Vs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nTHE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BOMB(...TRUNCATED)

{ "group": "Criminal" }

[{"result":[{"from_name":"label","id":"88585fe897c245a08fd02d51e306929b","to_name":"text","type":"la(...TRUNCATED)

{"text":"PETITIONER:\nSUKHA AND OTHERS\n\n Vs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN.\n\nDATE (...TRUNCATED)

{ "group": "Tax" }

[{"result":[{"from_name":null,"id":"af079e6062fa4fa3886224e52cafddf6","to_name":null,"type":null,"va(...TRUNCATED)

{"text":"PETITIONER:\nTHE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, MADRAS\n\nVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nMYSORE CHROMITE (...TRUNCATED)

{ "group": "Criminal" }

[{"result":[{"from_name":null,"id":"003c36b68e604501ba663618885f766e","to_name":null,"type":null,"va(...TRUNCATED)

{"text":"IN THE COURT OF THE III ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE AT\n (...TRUNCATED)

{ "group": "Criminal" }

[{"result":[{"from_name":"label","id":"1f864efa2a824d8c8d496b640608cf26","to_name":"text","type":"la(...TRUNCATED)

{"text":" TITLE SHEET FOR JUDGEMENTS IN SUIT\n\n IN THE COURT OF THE 1ST ADDL.CI(...TRUNCATED)

{ "group": "Criminal" }

[{"result":[{"from_name":null,"id":"a38a2f38a6864fd9afa3e5516a473bd0","to_name":null,"type":null,"va(...TRUNCATED)

{"text":"PETITIONER:\nSONI DEVRAJBHAI BABUBHAI\n\nVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS.\n\nD(...TRUNCATED)