GANGADHARAIAH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE judgment and order of conviction passed by the Fast Track Court -V, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore dated 28.1.2011 in S.C. No. 165/2008, is called in question in this appeal by the convicted accused.

(2.) CASE of the prosecution in brief is that the accused was having acquaintance with the deceased since many years; in the year 2007, accused had taken a loan of Rs. 20,000/ - from deceased Rathnamma with a promise that he will return back the same within three months; but the amount was not returned by him despite repeated demands by the deceased; one week prior to 23.12.2007, accused came to Huchammanadoddi village (the village in which deceased was living with her family members) by taking his lorry; deceased waylaid the lorry and dragged the accused, holding his shirt collar, out of the lorry in the presence of elders and abused him in filthy language. She slapped on the cheek of the accused; the accused became angry since he was insulted in the presence of villagers; with the said motive, accused decided to kill Rathnamma; on 23.12.2007 accused went to the house of the deceased situated in Huchammanadoddi village and informed her that she may accompany him so that he would repay the entire loan amount; he took Rathnamma to Anchepalya village near Samsung Godown in between 2.30 p.m. to 3.15 p.m. and strangulated and killed her; thereafter, in order to destroy the evidence, he took the three gold ornaments worn by the deceased; two of the gold ornaments were thrown by him in a nala, which was flowing and one of the gold ornament (M.O. No. 4) was taken by him and kept in his house, which came to be recovered during the course of investigation by the police. Though the deceased was unheard of from 23.12.2007, no missing complaint was lodged by any of the members of the deceased till the dead body was found; the dead body was found in a bush near the nala on 28.12.2007 by P.W. 8, who in turn, lodged the written complaint as per Ex. P5 before Bidadi police station at 5.20 p.m. on 28.12.2007, which came to be registered in crime No. 671/2007 for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. P.W. 15, the Inspector of Ramanagar Rural Circle completed the investigation and laid the charge sheet.

(3.) SRI Hashmath Pasha, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the defence/appellant taking us through the entire material on record submits that the Court below is not justified in convicting the accused since, absolutely no reliable material is found against him. Out of the two circumstances relied upon by the prosecution, one circumstance is recovery of a pair of ear studs marked as M.O. No. 4, which is totally unbelievable. Even the last seen theory put forth by the prosecution appears to be highly artificial in as much as, either P.W. 1 or any of the inmates of the house of the deceased would not have allowed the deceased to go along with the accused if really, the quarrel had taken place between the accused and the deceased prior to 23.12.2007; the accused is from a different village altogether and there is no connection whatsoever between the deceased and the accused; even according to the prosecution, the accused and deceased were intimately knowing each other and had got many transactions; in such a situation, it would be hard to believe that the accused had thrown two gold ornaments in the flowing water. According to him, the very fact that none of the family members of the deceased had lodged even a missing complaint after 23.12.2007 itself would clearly reveal that none of the family members of the deceased had suspected either the death or complicity of the accused in the death of the deceased. Lastly, he submits that the dead body was not identified and merely on the say of P.W. 1, the prosecution has created a false case against the accused.