KALAIAH ALIAS KALINGA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the Learned Amicus Curiae Sri Rajsubramanyabhat for the appellant and the Learned SPP for the Respondent-State and carefully perused the case records in detail with their assistance.

(2.) THE sole accused is the appellant. The deceased is one Mani alias Mahadevi, aged about 28 years. She was married to the accused about nine years prior to her death. During the relevant time of this incident, the appellant was staying in a hut in K. M. Doddi. The appellant has been convicted by the trial Court for the offence under Section 302, IPC, for having committed the murder of his wife, the deceased Mani on the night of 11-6-1994 at about 2 a. m. in his hut in K. M. Doddi. PW-1 is the brother of the deceased. PW-2 is the mother of the deceased and PW-1. PW-3 is the daughter of the deceased and the accused. PW-4 is the grand-daughter of PW-2 and the accused is her uncle. At the relevant time of this incident, she had come to live with PW-2. PWs. 6 and 7 are the neighbours of the accused and PW-2. They had their respective huts within the close proximity of the huts of the accused and PW-2. PW-9 is the owner of the land wherein PWs. 2, 6 and 7 had been residing by putting up their respective huts and so also the accused. It is the case of the prosecution that about a few days prior to her death, the deceased was ill-treated by the accused and driven out of the house along with her daughter PW-3. Thereupon both the deceased and her daughter PW-3, left with no other alternative, came to stay with PWs. 1 and 2 in their hut. While this was so, it is stated that on that incident night the accused came to the hut of PWs. 1 and 2 and after convincing them that he would look after the deceased well, took her alon gwith him to his hut. PW-3 however stayed back in the hut of PWs. 1 and 2. i. e. to say, she did not accompany her parents to the hut of the accused on that night. The hut of PW-6 was situated at a distance of about 25 feet from the hut of the accused. PW-7 was having his hut nearby the hut of PW-6 wherein he was running a hotel in the front portion and was residing in the back portion. The accused was always used to quarrel with the deceased and beat her in a drunken condition. PW-6 a close neighbour of the accused, had also seen the accused taking his wife, the deceased, along with him to his hut on that day at about 9. 30 or 10 p. m. Then on the following morning, when PW-3 went to see her mother in the hut of the accused, she found to her surprise that her mother was lying dead in the house and her father was found to be absent from the house. On seeing the same, PW-3 immediately returned to the hut of PWs. 1 and 2 and told them about what she saw in the hut of the accused. Then both PWs. 1 and 2 went to the hut of the accused and found the deceased lying dead in the hut. They further found that a plastic rope was tied around the neck of the deceased and a portion of her saree was found covering the face of the deceased. They also found that the accused was absent from his hut. Then the complainant PW-1 went to the Police Station and lodged a written complaint with the PSI PW-11 at about 8. 30 a. m. on 11-6-1994. On the basis of the complaint, the PSI PW-11 registered the case and the took up investigation. He deputed PW-10 for guarding the dead body of the deceased at the scene of incident. Thereafter the CPI, PW-13 took up the further investigation of this case from PW-11. he held inquest proceedings over the dead body of the deceased as per Ex. P4 and sent the dead body for its PM examination through PW-10. He also seized from the place of incident MOs. 1 to 4. He also made efforts to search for the accused and so also deputed the ASI PW-12 to trace the accused. Accordingly PW-12 made efforts to trace the accused by visiting Maddur, Mandya, Pandavapura, S. R. Patna and P. B. Manchanahalli. On 17-6-1994 when he was at P. B. Manchanahalli, he learnt through his informant that the accused is in K. R. Pet. Accordingly, he visited the K. R. Pet Police Station and took the accused to his custody and produced him before PW-13 at about 8 p. m. along with his report Ex. P7. PW-12 had seen the accused in K. M. Doddi earlier to 12-6-1994 as he was working as a coolie in K. M. Doddi. PW-13 caused the arrest of the accused. During the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer PW-13 recorded the statements of the material witnesses for the prosecution. After completion of investigation, he submitted the charge sheet against the accused to the Court.

(3.) PW-5 is the doctor who conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased on 11-6-1994 between 3 p. m. and 5. 15 p. m. She found a circular ligature mark around the neck of the deceased below the thyroid cartilage, of the size of 1 inch in breadth. An abrasion was also seen over the left side of the cheek and another abrasion over the right side of the cheek. An incised wound of the size of 1" x 1/2" was also found on the lower aspect of the chin. According to the doctor PW-5, the cause of death was due to asphyxia as a result of strangulation. Accordingly, she has issued the PM report as per Ex. P2 on 25-6-1994. The doctor PW-5 examined a plastic rope seized in that case and has opined that such a rope can cause asphyxia and death. She has also opined that such a rope can also cause the ligature mark found on the dead body of the deceased.