BEERE GOWDA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal at the instance of the accused arises out of the following facts:

(2.) The Sessions Judge vide his judgment dated 28th April 1999 held that the greater possibility on the evidence was that Pallavi had taken the acid by accident and that there was no evidence to suggest that it had been administered to her forcibly. The Court further held that there was no evidence to show that the two accused had in any way misbehaved with Jayanthi prior to the murder. The Trial Court also observed that the discrepancies inter se the statements of the witnesses went to the root of the matter and as such there was a doubt as to the truthfulness of the prosecution story.

(3.) An appeal was thereafter taken to the High Court. The High Court has, by the impugned judgment, set aside the acquittal of appellant No. 1 while maintaining that of the second accused and convicted and sentenced him under Section 302 of the IPC, with a sentence of imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default six months R.I.