GANGADHARAPPA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Gangadharappa, the Appellant No. 1 (since deceased), Siddappagari Manjunatha, the Appellant No. 2, Gopala, the Appellant No. 3 and Gadampalli Srinivasa, the Appellant No. 4, are alleged to have kidnapped the deceased Gowramma on 26th September, 2005, when she stepped out of house at about 100 p.m. to answer natures call. According to the prosecution, the Appellants took her to a nearby field and committed rape. The deceased set herself on fire at 5.00 p.m. on 27th September, 2005, as she apprehended that PW-3, her grand mother-in-law, to whom she confessed about the incident, would inform her husband and others. She was taken to the hospital at Sidlaghatta at 7.20 pm, where PW-23 recorded the dying declaration in the presence of PW-13 and PW-14, who are the doctors in the Hospital. Exhibit P-9, which is the dying declaration, was witnessed by PW-6, 8, 13 and 14. Gowramma died at 30 am on 28th September, 2005, after she was shifted to Bangalore.

(2.) The Appellants were tried for offences under Sections 376 (2) (g), 306 read with Section 34 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. The Appellants were acquitted by the Trial Court. The appeal filed by the State was allowed and all the four Appellants were convicted under Sections 376 (2) (g), 306 read with Section 34 and 506 I.P.C. They were sentenced to undergo imprisonment of ten years under Section 376 (2) (g), six years under Section 306 read with Section 34 and two years under Section 506 I.P.C.

(3.) The High Court held that the appreciation of evidence by the Trial Court was perverse. The High Court relied upon the dying declaration (Exhibit P-9) and also the oral dying declaration, which the deceased made to PW-3 (grand mother-in-law), PW-4, the grand father-in-law, PW-15, the Police constable and PW-18, the driver of the jeep, which carried the deceased to the hospital. The High Court further relied upon the judgment of this Court in Laxman v. State of Maharashtra (2002) 6 SCC 710, to hold that medical evidence will not prevail if there is oral evidence to the effect that the person making the dying declaration is in a fit condition.