Keriyappa and Others vs State of Karnataka

Budihal R.B., J—This appeal is preferred by appellant-accused Nos. 1 to 5 being aggrieved by the judgment and order of conviction dated 29.4.2010 passed by the I Fast Track Court at Shimoga in S.C No. 150/2007 convicting the appellants accused for the offences punishable under Section 307 read with section 149 and Sections 143, 144, 148, 326 read with section 34 of IPC and further appellant Nos. 2 and 3 are also convicted for the offences punishable under Section 324 read with section 34 of IPC.

Case of the prosecution in brief is that P.W.1 Jagadeesha lodged a complaint before the Soraba police station under Ex. P.1 stating that they are four brothers. Chandrappa, the 2nd brother of complainant, is residing separately, and the complainant and his other two brothers Sidramappa and Holiyappa are staying together. It is further stated that on 5.6.2006, Holiyappa, the younger brother of the complainant, went to the land with tractor and after tilling the said land, he came back to the village. At that time, Eshwarappa, the uncle of complainant started to abuse the complainant and his brothers in filthy language that they have come to till the land and he has also stated that he will lodge a complaint in that regard before the police. On 6.6.2006 at about 8.00 p.m., when the complainant was in the house, he heard the sound that his brother Chandrappa was being assaulted. Immediately, himself and his brothers Sidramappa and Holiyappa went to the said place and saw accused Nos. 1 to 5 were assaulting Chandrappa. Accused No. 1 Keriyappa holding kandali (chopper) in his hand assaulted Chandrappa and caused injury on the knee portion. Accused No. 3 Rudrappa also assaulted on the thighs of Chandrappa and caused injury. When the complainant went to the rescue, at that time, accused No. 3 Rudrappa assaulted him with the hands on the chest portion. Accused No. 5 Manjappa assaulted Sidramappa with club on his back and the toes of the left leg and caused injury. Accused No. 2 Ganapathi and accused No. 3 Rudrappa assaulted Holiyappa, the brother of the complainant, with stone on the back and the accused Ganapathi also assaulted Holiyappa with the club on the head portion and caused the injuries. When the complainant and his brothers cried for the help, due to the pain sustained by the blows given by the accused, the mother of the complainant and the neighbours came to their rescue and pacified the quarrel. Accused Nos. 1 and 3 assaulted Chandrappa with the chopper on the left leg and caused the fracture of bones. Accused Nos. 1 to 5 have also abused them in filthy language and posed the life threat and went away by throwing the clubs and stones at the spot. As the leg of Chandrappa was cut and as there was bleeding, he was taken to the Government Hospital at Sagar so also Holiyappa was taken to the said Government Hospital. As per the advice of the Doctor at Government Hospital, Sagar, Chandrappa was taken to Mc. Gann hospital at Shimoga. Hence, the complainant requested to take action against the said accused persons. On the basis of the said complaint, Soraba police registered the case in crime No. 78/2006 and issued FIR as per Ex. P.8.

After completing the investigation, the investigating officer filed charge sheet against the accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 504, 323, 324, 326, 506 read with section 149 of IPC. Subsequently, the offence under Section 307 of IPC was also included as per the requisition made by the Police Sub Inspector under Ex. P.14. After framing the charges and as the accused persons not pleaded guilty, the charge was framed against them for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 148, 326, 324, 307 read with Section 149 of IPC.

The prosecution in support of its case, examined in all 9 witnesses P.Ws.1 to 9 and got marked the documents Exs. P.1 to 16(a) and also got marked M.Os.1 to 4. On the side of the defence, no witnesses were examined. However, the documents Exs. D.1 to D.14 were got marked by the defence.

After considering the merits of the case, ultimately, the trial Court convicted accused Nos. 1 to 5 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 148, 326, read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 307 read with Section 149 of IPC. The trial Court further convicted accused Nos. 2 and 3 for the offence punishable under Section 324 r/w. Section 34 of IPC.

Being aggrieved by the judgment and order of conviction and the sentence imposed by the trial Court, the appellants-accused Nos. 1 to 5 have preferred the present appeal challenging the legality and correctness of the same on the grounds as mentioned in para Nos. 6 to 17 of the appeal memorandum.

We have heard the arguments of the learned Counsel appearing for the appellants-accused and also the learned SPP appearing for the respondent-State.

Learned Counsel for the appellants-accused, during the course of the arguments, submitted that the dispute between the parties is in respect of Sy. Nos. 78 and 79 of Dugur Village. He submitted that when there was a partition in the family of the complainant Jagadeesha and the other family members, certain properties were given to the share of Gamappa, who subsequently died unmarried. It is also his submission that it is the accused persons herein were cultivating the land of Gamappa, and katha and pahani also stood in the name of the accused persons. The complainant and his brothers were claiming the share in the lands of Gamappa and because of that reason, they were making galata with the accused persons. Even on the date of incident also, it is the witnesses P.W.1-Jagadeesha, P.W.4-Holiyappa, P.W.6-Chandrappa and one Sidramappa came to the house of Eshwarappa i.e. the uncle of accused No. 2 Ganapathi. The said Ganapathi had also been to the house of his uncle Eshwarappa. The said witnesses along with Sidramappa, picked up quarrel with Ganapathi and assaulted him. When accused No. 4-Somappa, who is the father of Ganapathi, came to the said place, he was also assaulted severely on the head portion and fracture injuries were caused to Somappa. Hence, the learned counsel submitted that in that connection, a counter case was registered against the witnesses P.W.1, 4 and 6 and one Sidramappa in Soraba P.S. crime No. 77/2006 for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 324, 506 r/w section 34 of IPC. Hence, he submitted that it is the witnesses P.W.1, 4 and 6 and one Sidramppa, who are the aggressors, are the persons responsible for initiation of the incident and not the accused persons. The accused persons have not at all assaulted the witnesses nor abused them. Even if it is assumed, for the sake of the arguments and appreciation of the case, that the accused have caused any injuries to the complainant and his brothers, it is not intentional and deliberate, but it is only in exercise of their right of private defence and hence, there is no offence committed by the accused persons. The learned counsel drew attention of this Court to the counter case in respect of Crl. Appeal No. 732/2010 which is also pending before this Court and submitted that the trial Court has wrongly read the evidence and has wrongly proceeded in the matter to convict the accused persons. He made submission that the judgment of the trial Court is not in accordance with the evidence placed on record, both oral and documentary and hence, sought to allow the appeal and to set aside the judgment and order of conviction and the sentence imposed by the trial Court.

Sri. P.M. Nawaz, learned SPP appearing for the respondent State, during the course of the arguments, submitted that the trial Court has appreciated the materials properly and rightly convicted the accused persons for the offences referred above. There is no illegality in the judgment of the trial Court and no interference is called for by this Court. Hence, submitted to dismiss the appeal.

We have perused the materials placed on record, both oral and documentary.

The witnesses examined on the side of the State before the trial Court are P.W.1 Jagadeesha. He is the complainant who filed complaint as per Ex. P.1 on the basis of which, a case was registered in Sorab P.S. Crime No. 78/2006 against accused Nos. 1 to 5, who are the appellants herein. P.W. 2 K. Sathyappa is the eye witness to the incident as well as panch witness to Ex. P.2 spot mahazar under which M.O.1 stone and M.O.2 club are said to have been seized. P.W.3 Ramappa is the panch witness for the seizure of M.Os.3 and 4 Kandalis (choppers) which are said to have been seized under the seizure mahazar -Ex.P.3. P.W.4 Holiyappa is the injured eye witness. Ex. P.16 is the wound certificate issued in respect of P.W.4. P.W.5 is the Doctor at Government Hospital, Sagar. He issued wound certificate Ex. P. 15 in respect of the injured Chandrappa. He has also produced Ex. P.4 accident register. P.W.6 Chandrappa is another injured person and because of the said injuries, his left knee is said to be amputed and the injury certificate is at Ex. P.15. P.W.7 Dr. Pramod Kumar is another doctor who has issued Ex. P.7 medical certificate in respect of P.W.6 Chandrappa. P.W.8 H.N. Jagannath is the PSI who registered the crime and he has also conducted investigation to some extent and filed charge sheet. P.W.9 Dr. Subramanya speaks about Exs. P.15 and 16 in respect of P.W.6.

It is the submission of learned counsel appearing for the appellants accused that there was a counter case against the complainant and his brothers in S.C No. 148/2008 and the connected Crl. Appeal before this Court in Crl. A. No. 732/2010. Accused No. 2 Ganapathi, in the case on hand, was the complainant in the counter case registered in Soraba P.S. crime No. 77/2006. P.W.1 Jagadeesha, P.W.4 Holiyappa and P.W.6 Chandrappa along with one Sidramappa are the accused in the connected case.

We have perused Ex. P.8 FIR marked in this case. The date of incident in the said FIR is shown as 6.6.2006 at 20.00 hours. We have also perused the FIR in the connected appeal Crl.A. No. 732/2010 wherein FIR was marked as Ex. P.9 and the date of incident is shown as 6.6.2006 and the time is mentioned as 19.30 hours.

We have also perused the evidence of P.W.8 H.M. Jagannath, who is the investigating officer. During the course of cross examination, he has deposed and admitted as true that crime Nos. 78/2006 and 77/2006 are the case and counter cases. He has admitted that in crime No. 77/2006 also, he is the investigating officer. He further admitted that both the incidents took place in between the house of Sridhar and Patel Eshwarappa, as mentioned in Panchanamas. Therefore, looking to the these materials on record so also the evidence of the prosecution witnesses in both appeals, we are of the clear opinion that they are the case and counter cases.

The injured in this case are P.W.6-Chandrappa and P.W.4-Holiyappa, who are also the accused persons in another connected case. Looking to the evidence of P.W.4 Holiyappa, he has deposed that his uncle Gamappa expired about 25 years back and he was having the landed properties. The said Gamappa died issueless After the demise of said Gamappa, Eshwarappa, Somappa and Manjappa were enjoying the property of Gamappa. His brother Chandrappa-P.W.6 was taking the lead in demanding share from the accused in the property of Gamappa. In the panchayath, it was decided that the share is to be given to them also. But the accused did not agree for the same and in that connection, there was difference of opinion and enmity between themselves and the accused. He further deposed that on 6.6.2006 at 8.00 p.m., they were all in their house. His brother Chandrappa was crying in front of the house of Sridhar and they all i.e. himself, Sidramappa, Jagadeesha, Kanamane Sathyappa, Parvathamma, Kouthi Ganapathiyappa rushed to the spot and saw that accused Nos. 1 to 5 present there and they were making galata with Chandrappa. Accused No. 1 Keriyappa and accused No. 3 Rudrappa were having kandali and the other accused were having clubs and stones. Accused No. 1 Keriyappa assaulted Chandrappa with kandali on the left knee. Accused No. 3 Rudrappa also assaulted on the left thigh of Chandrappa-P.W.6, who collapsed on the ground. When they went to the rescue of Chandrappa, the accused assaulted them also. Accused No. 2 Ganapathi assaulted him with club on the back portion of the head and there was bleeding injury. Accused No. 3 Rudrappa assaulted him on the left side shoulder portion and thereafter, Somappa fisted all of them. Accused No. 5 Manjappa assaulted Sidramappa on the toes and on the back with club. Accused No. 3 fisted P.W.1 Jagadeesha on his chest. Accused No. 5 Manjappa assaulted P.W.1 Jagadeesha, P.W.6 Chandrappa and Sidramappa with club. Thereafter, the accused threw the stones and clubs there only and went away abusing them in filthy language and posing the threat that they will commit their murder. But, they carried the sword and chopper with them. Jagadeesha and Sidramappa sustained simple injuries. The leg of P.W.6 was cut and thereafter, they shifted him to the hospital at Sagar and then, to Mc. Gann hospital and thereafter, to Manipal hospital.

In the cross examination, P.W.4 has admitted that the property of Gamappa was cultivated by accused No. 4 Somappa and his sons. He has also admitted that pahani and katha of land of Gamappa is in the name of the accused. Accused might have raised loan on the said land and they are paying tax. He has admitted as true that nearby the spot, there is house of Eshwarappa. Their house is at the distance of 100 ft. He has repeated the assault made by the accused persons and also about the fact what he has deposed in his examination in chief. He has deposed that he does not know that, in the said incident, accused No. 4 Somappa and accused No. 2 Ganapathi sustained injuries. He denied the suggestion that, in incident in question, accused Nos. 1, 3 and 5 were not at all present.

P.W.6 Chandrappa has deposed in his evidence that on 6.6.2006, he had been to the house of Sridhar to get the workers. Sridhar was not in the house. He was returning back to his house. It was about 8.00 p.m. and the accused came there. Accused No. 4 Somappa and accused No. 5 Manjappa caught hold his hand. At that time, he tried to get relieved and cried loudly. Then, P.W.1 Jagadeesha, Sidramappa, his another brother Sathyappa, his mother Parvathamma and his brother Holiyappa, all rushed to the spot. Accused No. 1 assaulted on his left knee with kandali. Then accused No. 3 assaulted on his left thigh with kandali. When P.W.4 Holiyappa and his another brother Sidramappa came to the rescue, accused assaulted them also. As his leg was cut, he fell on the ground and lost consciousness. He regained consciousness, when he was in the Sagar hospital. His leg was amputed. He underwent five surgeries. The accused with an intention to commit his murder, cut his left leg. The accused are present before the Court. Along with him, his brother Holiyappa is also injured.

In the cross examination, P.W.6 has admitted that katha of the land of Gamappa is in the name of accused and they are in possession. They are asking the share in the land of Gamappa. In that regard, there was dispute between them and the accused. He has also repeated about the assault made by the accused against him and the others as deposed in the examination in chief. He has not seen accused No. 4 Somappa and accused No. 2 Ganapathi sustaining the injuries in the incident. He has denied the suggestion that he is deposing falsely that when he had been to the house of Sridhar, Accused No. 4 Somappa and accused No. 5 Manjappa caught hold him. Accused No. 1 Keriyappa and accused No. 3 Rudrappa assaulted him with kandali and when he cried for the help, his mother and brothers came to the spot. He has admitted that against them also, the counter case is pending in the same Court.

P.W.7 Dr. Pramod Kumar has deposed in his evidence that he has seen the certificate Ex. P.7 which is issued by him. He has deposed that on 7.6.2006, the injured admitted in their hospital at Manipal and he underwent five surgeries.

It is the case of prosecution that accused Nos. 1 and 3 namely Keriyappa and Rudrappa gave their voluntary statements as per Exs. P.11 and 12. They led the police and panchas to the place i.e., the fence where they had kept the kandalis, took out them and produced before the police. In this regard, the prosecution has examined P.W. 3 Ramappa who has deposed in his evidence that the police called him to the nearby house of Sridhar as pancha. Accused Nos. 1 and 3 were present with the police. One Nagaraj was also present as co-pancha. Accused Nos. 1 and 3 told that they have hidden kandalis in the fence. The said fence is nearby the house of Sridhar. Accused No. 3 took them to the said place and produced two kandalis. The police have seized the kandalis as per M.Os.3 and 4 under Ex. P.3 seizure mahazar.

In the cross examination, he has deposed that he has not spoken to Rudrappa and Keriyappa. They were made to sit inside the jeep. He was standing on the road and accused brought and produced kandali. He has not seen where the kandalis were lying. He does not know that the mahazar Ex. P.3 was written nearby the house of Sridhar. He denied the suggestion that he is falsely deposing that accused Nos. 1 and 3 have produced M.Os.3 and 4.

P.W.1 Jagadeesha is the complainant and he is the brother of P.Ws.4 and 6. He has deposed in his examination in chief that his father and uncles separated about 30 years back. His father expired about 14 years back. Sy No. 78 is the property of his grand father. In connection with property of Gamappa, there was dispute between themselves and the accused. Gamappa died issueless. Somappa, Eshwarappa and Manjappa were enjoying the properties of Gamappa. His brother Chandrappa P.W.6 was asking share in the property of Gamappa. On 6.6.2006, when P.W.6 Chandrappa was proceeding at about 8.00 p.m. in front of the house of Sridhar, all the accused persons started assaulting him and he cried, then they rushed to the spot. The spot is 100 ft away from their house. Accused No. 1 Keriayppa holding kandali assaulted on the knee of Chandrappa. Rudrappa assaulted with kandali on the left thigh of Chandrappa. Accused Nos. 2 and 3 both assaulted P.W.4 Holiyappa. Accused No. 4 Somappa fisted all of them. Accused No. 3 Rudrappa also fisted him. Accused No. 5 Manjappa assaulted Sidramppa on his back and on the left toes with club. The accused while going from the spot, abused the complainant and his brothers and the other family members in filthy language and thrown the stone and club in the said place and went with kandali. They were taken to Sagar hospital. Thereafter, shifted to hospital at Shimoga and then, to Manipal hospital. The spot mahazar was conducted by the police in his presence as per Ex. P.2 and Ex. P.2(b) is his signature. M.O.1 is the stone and M.O.2 is the club seized under Ex. P.2. The kandalis used by accused Nos. 1 and 3 are M.Os.3 and 4. His brother Chandrappa/PW-6 took treatment for two months and his left leg was amputated.

In the cross-examination by the advocate for the accused, PW-1 has deposed that the accused were cultivating the land of Gamappa, the pahani and khata may be in the name of accused persons. It is true that accused obtained loan on the said land. They are claiming that they are also having share in the said property; but they have not issued notice to the accused nor filed suit before the Civil Court claiming the share. He denied the suggestion that on 05.06.2006 he along with Chandrapa PW-6 and his other brothers went to the land of the accused to cultivate the same and accused did not allow them to cultivate and at that time himself, PW-4 Holiyappa, PW6-Chandrappa and Siddaramappa made assault on the accused. He has shown ignorance about the suggestion that, on 06.06.2006 at about 6.00 p.m. accused No. 4-Somappa went to Soraba Police station and gave the complaint and sought protection from the Police. He admitted as true that spot panchanama was conducted infront of the house of Patel Eshwarappa on the panchayat road. He has also repeated in the cross-examination and deposed about which accused assaulted whom and caused the injuries, as he deposed in his examination-in-chief. He has not taken treatment. He has also deposed and admitted as true that as the accused gave the complaint against them, he has given the complaint against the accused. He has not seen the accused sustaining injuries in the said incident. He denied the suggestion that they have filed false case against the accused making false allegations.

We have also perused the evidence of PW-2 K. Sathyappa, who claims that he is an eye-witness to the incident. But looking to the answers given by him in the cross-examination, it shows that he is not the eye-witness to the incident as he has admitted that he has stated before the Police that he came to know about the incident. Therefore, he is hearsay witness.

PW-5 K.R. Prakash Bonsle, the doctor, has deposed in his evidence that on 06.06.2006 at 8.30 p.m. PW-6/Chandrappa was brought to his hospital alleging that Rudrappa accused No. 3 and Keriyappa accused No. 1 assaulted him. With regard to the treatment given to the injured, he made a mention in Ex. P-4 accident register. On the same day he examined PW-4/Holiyappa and it was told that accused No. 3 Rudrappa assaulted him with club. He examined kandali refereed to him and gave his opinion as per Ex. P-6 and P-6(a) is his signature. The said kandalis are M.Os.3 and 4. He has opined that from MOs.3 and 4 the injuries are possible. The injuries as mentioned in Ex. P-4 can be caused if, assaulted with club and stones.

In the cross-examination, PW-5 has deposed that on the same day at about 9''o clock accused No. 4 Somappa was also examined by him and Somappa told before him about the assault made on him by PW-6 Chandrappa and others. He has seen the injury certificate marked as per Ex. D-3, which is issued by him pertaining to the injuries of Somappa and there is a fractured injury.

PW-8 H.M. Jagannath is the Investigating Officer, who conducted the investigation in this case, so also in the counter case and filed the charge sheet in both the cases.

Perusing the materials on record, the presence of the accused is spoken to by the prosecution witnesses more particularly the injured witnesses about which we have already made the reference above. Not only that, perusing the counter case in another criminal appeal in Crl.A. No. 732/2010, three accused in this case namely Ganapathi, Somappa and Rudrappa are the witnesses and PW-4 Holiyappa, PW-6 Chandrappa, one Siddaramappa and PW-1 Jagadeesha are the accused persons in the said connected appeal. Therefore, looking to all these materials on record, it clearly show the presence of accused Nos. 1 to 5 at the spot, when the incident took place. The materials also show that the accused herein have formed an unlawful assembly and being the members of unlawful assembly accused Nos. 1 and 3 were armed with kandali (choppers) and accused Nos. 2, 4 and 5 were armed with clubs. The materials also show that accused No. 1 Keriyappa and accused No. 3 Rudrappa assaulted PW-6 Chandrappa on his left leg with kangalis and thereby caused the bleeding injuries; thereafter, when he was taken to the hospital the left leg was amputated.

Regarding the nature of injury caused to PW-6-Chandrappa, Ex. P-15 wound certificate show that injury No. 1 is the auto amputation at the level of left knee joint with skin intact anteriorly, injury No. 2 is a lacerated measuring 3" X 1" over the anterior side of left thigh. The doctor opined that injury No. 1 is grievous in nature and injury No. 2 is simple in nature.

Persuing the wound certificate Ex. P-16 in respect of PW-4/Holiyappa, he has sustained four injuries: i) Lacerated wound measuring 2" X 1/2" in the parietal region with scalp edema; ii) Abrasions over the left shoulder joint; iii) Contusion over the back on the left side and iv) Abrasion over the right foot. The doctor has opined that the above said injuries are simple in nature.

Though it is contended by the prosecution that the accused caused the injuries with an intention to commit the murder of Chandrappa and Holiyappa and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC is concerned, the grievous injury sustained by PW-6 Chandrappa are concerned, it is the defence of the accused that when accused No. 2 Ganapathi had been to the house of Sridhar to get the coolie and when he was about to return back, the witnesses i.e., PW-1 Jagadeesha, PW-4 Holiyappa, PW-6 Chandrappa along with one Siddaramappa came there and picked-up quarrel with Ganapathi, assaulted him; on hearing the same when Sompappa accused No. 4 came there, they have also assaulted Somappa and caused the fractured injuries over the head of Somappa, which is evidenced by the doctor certificate produced as per Ex. D-3. Looking to the place of the injuries caused, it is not on the vital part of the body like neck or the chest, but it is on the leg portion.

Considering all these aspects of the matter it can be said that accused Nos. 1 and 3 are liable for the offence punishable under Section 326 of IPC and not for the offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC as observed by the Trial Court. So far as accused No. 2 Ganapathi is concerned, there is evidence that he assaulted PW-4 Holiyappa on the back side of the head with stick; the injury certificate in respect of Holiyappa is also produced before the Court. Looking to the injury certificate of PW-4 Holiyappa, the injuries are simple in nature. Therefore, accused No. 2 Ganapathi is liable for the offence punishable under Section 323 of IPC.

In respect of accused No. 4-Somappa and accused No. 5-Manjappa, though the witnesses have stated that these accused have also assaulted and caused injuries to the other witnesses, but the said contentions are not supported by the supporting material like injury certificate or the evidence of the doctor stating that they have sustained injuries. Therefore, they cannot be held liable for the alleged offence punishable either under Section 326 or under Section 324 of IPC and their liability is in forming an unlawful assembly and being the member of unlawful assembly, holding the weapons and participated in the incident i.e., for the offence under Sections 143, 144 and 148 of IPC read with section 149 of IPC.

When it is the case and counter case, the Trial Court ought to have correctly ascertained, who are the aggressors and who are responsible for the initiation of the incident. But perusing the judgment of the Trial Court in both the Sessions Cases i.e., in S.C. No. 150/2007 and S.C. No. 148/2008, the Trial Court has observed that the accused are aggressors. This view of the Trial Court is not correct. The materials on record show that the incident is because of the previous enmity and dispute between the parties in respect of the land of Gamappa, but the witnesses in this case have clearly admitted that accused are in possession of land of Gamappa, khata is in their name, they are paying the kandayam and PW-6 Chandrappa was taking the lead for claiming share in the property of Gamappa. Materials also show that on the date of the incident when this accused No. 2 Ganapathi had been to the house of Sridhar for getting the workers and when he was about to return, the witnesses i.e., PWs-1, 4 and 6 along with one Siddaramappa came and assaulted accused No. 2 Ganapathi nearby the house of Patel Eshwarappa and house of Sridhar. It has also come on record that house of the witnesses is at the distance of 100 feet from the spot, when that is so, why they have gone there? So looking to all these materials, we are of the clear opinion that the witnesses PWs-1, 4 and 6 and Siddramappa, who are the accused in connected case in S.C. No. 148/2008 are the aggressors.

Hence, we proceed to pass the following order:

"(a) The appeal is allowed in part.

(b) Accused Nos. 1 to 5 are acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 149 of IPC.

(c) Accused No. 1 Keriyappa and accused No. 3 Rudrappa are convicted for the offence punishable under Section 326 read with Section 34 of IPC. They are sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- each and in default of payment of fine amount, they shall undergo simple imprisonment for one year.

(d) Accused No. 2 Ganapathi is convicted for the offence punishable under Section 323 of IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine amount, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for three months.

(e) Accused Nos. 1 to 5 are sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under section 143 read with section 149 of IPC.

(f) Accused Nos. 1 to 5 are sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year for the offences punishable under Sections 144 and 148 read with section 149 of IPC.

(g) The above sentences shall run concurrently.

(h) If the fine amount is paid, Rs. 1,75,000/- shall be paid to P.W.6 Chandrappa by way of compensation as per section 357 of Cr.P.C. and the remaining amount shall have to go to the State.

(i) A1 to A5 are entitled to benefit of set-off of the custody period which they have already undergone, as per Section 428 of CR.P.C.

(j) The judgment and order of conviction of the trial Court is accordingly modified."