PRAKASH @ NAMI, S/O. MOUNESH Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, BELLARY, RURAL POLICE STATION, BELLARY. REP. BY S.P.P., BANGALORE.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE material facts of the case of the prosecution is that one Anand is the deceased. Appellants 1 to 4 are the accused before the trial court (for sheet A1 to A4). A -2 died during pendency of the appeal. Hence the appeal filed by A -2 abates. A -1 is the nephew of PW 14 There was proposal of marriage of Kalyani with A -1. Since there was heavy dowry demand, the alliance did nor come through. Later on, Vishnuvardhan Rao -PW 14, father of Kalyani fixed the marriage of his daughter - Kalayani with the deceased. The betrothal function was held, A -1 was bearing grouse against the deceased since he was getting married to Kalyani. On 16.5.01, the deceased took his aunt PW 2 on a motor cycle to give drop to her house at 9.00 pm and thereafter, he did not return and was found missing. The motor cycle was found at STD booth of PW 18. One Anjanappa - PW 15 is the father of the deceased. He made extensive enquiries to trace the whereabouts of his missing son, but is of vain. PW 15 lodged the missing complaint before the police on 18.5.01 to the effect that the deceased was last seen by one Babu - PW 18 who is a boy working in STD booth. The deceased had gone to STD booth and had made some telephone calls. Thereafter he said to have gone away and found missing.

(2.) ON 21.5.01, PW 15 gave another complaint suspecting that A1 to A3 and two others have abducted the deceased and kept in illegal confinement. Later on, the dead body was found floating in the river. The said foot was reported to the police. PW 15 has identified the dead body as that of his missing son. The inquest is held, A1 and A2 were arrested on 24.5.01. A3 and A4 are arrested on 30.5.2001, At the voluntary instance of A -3, plastic rope - MO6 was recovered which is said to be used for strangulating the deceased. The PM report discloses that the death is due to asphyxia as a result of strangulation.

(3.) THE prosecution has relied upon the following circumstances to prove the guilt of the accused: - a) The motive that A.1 was bearing grouse against the deceased for getting married to Kalyani. A2 to A4 are friends of A -1 and his sympathisers in the cause. b) A1 to A4 abducted the deceased in Tata sumo belonging to PW 11. PW 9 is said to be the driver of Tata sumo. The deceased while being taken by the accused, he was throttled and killed and dead body was thrown in the river. PW 9 was threatened not to disclose the information. Therefore, he had meekly accompanied the accused as per their dictates and also did not reveal the fact to any body until the police interrogated him. c) PW 18 - Babu is said to be the working in STD booth who has last seen the deceased when he made telephonic calls and thereafter, two persons came and took away the deceased. The said two persons are identified as A3 and A4 in the Court. d) The PM report discloses that the death is homicidal. e) PW 15, father of the deceased given evidence with regard to marriage of the deceased - Kalyani and also regarding missing of the deceased and lodged the complaint to the police as per Ex.P16 and missing complaint as per Ex.P 17 respectively. PW 14 is the lather of Kalyani and he has given evidence to the effect that the marriage of the Kalyani with the deceased was engaged and betrothal function was also held. He also states that earlier proposal of marriage of Kalyani with A -1 did not materalise because there was heavy demand of dowry. So A -1 was bearing grouse against him as well as against the deceased. f) Recovery of plastic rope - MO 6 is of no consequence because the body was totally decomposed and there was no scope for matching MO 6 with the legature mark on the neck.