STATE Vs. CHIKKANNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE facts of this case are rather unusual and interesting and in our considered view, had there been a sincere professional and in-depth investigation, the outcome of the trial could have been different. Accused No. 2 Siddagangamma is the wife of the deceased Chittaiah. Accused No. 1 Chikkanna is a distant relation of Chittaiah and the admitted position is that he used to visit the house of the couple quite often. Incidentally, the record also indicates that Chittaiah and his wife were living with their family members and they were not the sole occupants of the dwelling place. On the morning of 20-6-1991, Chittaiah was found dead. According to the prosecution, on the previous night, the other occupants of the house had gone to different places for different reasons and the deceased and his wife, Accused No. 2 were the only persons in the house. The prosecution further alleges that Accused No. 1 had developed an illicit intimacy with Accused No. 2, that this continued for quite some time and that the couple left the village and went to stay at Nelamangala. This created a lot of problems in the family and finally, steps were taken to bring the wife Accused No. 2 and the children back to the village and undoubtedly there was a lot of intervention from family members, Panchayatdars etc. , and Accused Nos. 1 and 2 were made to publicly take a vow before the Venkataramana Swamy Temple in the village, that they would not continue the illicit affair any longer. It appears that after this, Accused No. 2 and the children were residing with the husband Chittaiah along with other family members and that this was the position as on the night of 19-6-1991.

(2.) PW-1 Thimmaiah is the younger brother of the deceased Chittaiah and he states that on the previous night when he came to the house, he was told by Accused No. 2 that his brother Chittaiah was sleeping. She further stated that he had been ill for two days and that he had been suffering from symptoms of vomiting and loose motions, that he had taken some medicine and that he had only consumed a little rice ganji and gone to sleep. Thimmaiah believed this story and left the house. He spent the night in the house at Master Veeranna's house (PW-2) and he states that early in the morning he was informed that Chittaiah had died. He came to the house and according to him, on looking at the neck of the deceased, there were distinct impressions of strangulation insofar as the finger imprints were quite prominent and there were some minor injuries such as nail marks. He then realised that Chittaiah had been murdered and the case was reported to the police. The police sent the body for post-mortem examination and it was confirmed that the death was of asphyxia due to strangulation. The police arrested the Accused Nos. 1 and 2 principally on the ground that it was obvious that Chittaiah was an obstacle to their love affair and that, therefore, they had a strong animus against him because he was instrumental in bringing Accused No. 2 and the children back to the house and taking all the subsequent action and furthermore that, if he was eliminated from the picture, that the affair could continue unabated.

(3.) THE defence has proposed the parallel theory that there were some disputes with regard to the partition of the property and that this could have been one of the reasons why Chittaiah was murdered or that there could have been several other reasons. The learned Trial Judge after evaluating the evidence acquitted the accused on the ground that the charges were not established and it is against this order of acquittal the present appeal has been preferred.