SIDDESH S/O LINGAPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed by the accused-appellant in S.C.No.56/2006 challenging the Judgement dated 13.12.06 passed by the Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court V, Tumkur, convicting him for offences punishable under sections 302 and 201 Penal Code and sentencing him undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000.00, in default to suffer R.I. for a further period of 3 months for the offence under section 302 IPC; the accused is further sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000.00 in default to undergo R.I. for a further period of 3 months for the offence under Sec. 201 of Penal Code with a further direction for both the sentences to run concurrently..

(2.) It is the case of the prosecution that the accused is the husband of the deceased Ratnamma who was the daughter of Hanumantharayappa and Jayamma and the marriage between the deceased and the accused was celebrated 8 years prior to the date of incident and out of the said wedlock a son was born to them who was aged 5 years. The accused and the deceased were staying in Bangalore and thereafter returned to Kyathaganahalli and were residing together in the house belonging to the maternal grandfather of the accused and both the husband and wife were doing coolie work. However, there were frequent quarrels between the accused and the deceased and the accused had incurred debts and therefore, he intended to sell the house. It is the case of the prosecution that on 29.12.2005 the deceased had come to the house of her parents and returned to her house on the same night. Thereafter, the deceased was not found on the next day. Then P.Ws. 1 & 2 asked the accused as to where the deceased had gone. The accused informed that deceased had gone to Bangalore for coolie work. On 1.1.2006 one Lakshmamma informed the parents of the deceased (P.Ws. 1 & 2) that a dead body was found in a pit belonging to one Chittanna and P.Ws. 1 & 2 along with others went there and identified the dead body as that of the deceased. Thereafter, a complaint was filed before the police which was registered as Cr. No.1/2006 for offences punishable under sections 302 & 201 IPC. The investigating officer conducted the investigation. After conducting inquest proceedings on the dead body, subjected the dead body for post mortem examination. On 2.1.2006 the PSI seized the weapon-wooden pounder (onake)-and other articles as per Ex.P-2. The accused was arrested and was subjected to judicial custody.

(3.) The prosecution in order to prove its case has examined in all 24 witnesses and got marked Exs.P-1 to P- 36 and produced M.Os. 1 to 16. The defence of the accused was one of total denial. However, by the impugned judgment, the learned Sessions Judge has convicted the accused and sentenced him as aforementioned. The accused has filed this appeal challenging the order of conviction.