LAWS(SC)-2018-2-175

ESWARAPPA @ DOOPADA ESWARAPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Decided On February 15, 2018
Eswarappa @ Doopada Eswarappa Appellant
V/S
STATE OF KARNATAKA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant-accused has preferred this appeal against the impugned judgment passed by the High Court whereby the High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction and sentence of the appellant passed by the trial court. The trial court convicted the appellant for offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, the 'IPC') and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment, for having committed murder of his wife viz., Laxmi @ Lalitha.

(2.) At this stage, the questions of motive, intention, etc., are not of much consequence. Indeed, the arguments have not been advanced on that aspect by learned counsel for both sides. The main question for our consideration is whether the deceased Laxmi @ Lalitha who was found hanging by a plastic rope, died due to homicide or suicide. Obviously, the appellant can be found guilty only if death is caused due to homicidal hanging. The body of the deceased Laxmi @ Lalitha was found hanging from a high beam by a plastic rope. There were two ligature marks on the neck of the deceased-one was horizontal on the Hyoid bone and the other higher up, where the knot went up along the side of the ear. This ligature mark was at an angle. There were no other injuries on the body of the deceased at all, not even bruises marks caused by forcible manhandling which occur if a person is to be forcibly hanged unless a person is drugged. There were no signs of struggle near the place where the victim was hanged. Indeed, in our view, the absence of any sign of struggle is significant in the present case if we are to hold that this is a case of homicidal hanging.

(3.) There is a possibility that there would be no signs of struggle if the victim is first rendered unconscious, then strangulated and thereafter, hanged; but despite repeated examination of the evidence, we find no such sign. Hence, there is no evidence that the victim was first rendered unconscious. This could have only been done by a blow on the head or due to intoxication or by some drugs or by some other equally effected means. There is no evidence of any means which may have been employed to make the victim unconscious first.