'Let 100s of guilty escape, punish not one innocent'

NT Correspondent

Bengaluru: The High Court has set aside the conviction of three persons who were found guilty by a Trial Court of causing grievous injuries after it found evidence was lacking. “It is a very settled criminal law or criminal jurisprudence that hundreds of guilty can escape from the clutches of law, but even one innocent should not be punished,” the HC said, acquitting Srinivas, Yogegowda and Shivanna, all from KR Pete taluk in Mandya.

“Here in this case, there is no positive evidence before the Court to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. The Trial Court ought to have granted the benefit of doubt and acquitted the appellants but convicting the appellantsaccused based on scanty evidence of the doctor who was not an eye witness and only treated the injured,” Justice K Natarajan said allowing the appeal filed by the three convicts. It was alleged that on September 3, 2009, at 3 am the accused persons entered the home of the victim and assaulted him with deadly weapons. The accused had denied the charges against them.

However, the Trial Court found them guilty under Section 324 (voluntarily causing hurt) and Section 326 (voluntarily causing grievous hurt with weapons) punishing them with three months’ imprisonment and two years of rigorous imprisonment for each of the offences. They challenged it before the HC by filing an appeal i n 2012. The HC gave its judgement on the appeal recently. The HC found that except for the police and the doctor who treated the victim no other witness supported the prosecution case.

“Except the Investigating Officer and the doctor who treated the injured, no other witnesses have supported the prosecution case. The doctor also did not state that the accused assaulted the injured except making note of the names of the assailants,” the HC noted.

The HC also noticed that there was a complaint and a counter-complaint between the accused and the complainants. “It appears there was a case and a counter case registered between two groups where the parties have settled their issues and turned hostile. When the counter case also ended in acquittal, the question of conducting another counter case by the trial court is not correct. The trial Court has committed an error in convicting the appellant and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for the insufficient evidence lead before the Court,” the HC said.

Allowing the appeal and acquitting the three accused, the HC said, “The Trial Court cannot convict the accused based upon the statement made to the police until it is proved by examining those witnesses that too they shall support their statements, otherwise, no question of admitting the statement in the court arises. Therefore, I am of the view that the judgment of the trial Court convicting the appellants is not correct and liable to be set aside.”