THE STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. IRUDAYARAJU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE judgment and order dated 5.8.2010, passed by the Fast Track Court -II, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore in SC. No. 319/2009, is called in question in this appeal by the State.

(2.) THE accused -respondent herein was charged with the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. However, he is convicted for the offence punishable under Section 326 of IPC by the trial Court. The State is aggrieved by the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the trial Court acquitting the accused of the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. Hence, this appeal. Case of the prosecution in brief is that the deceased Vincent is the husband of the complainant -Smt. Joy; accused is the younger brother of Vincent; Smt. Joy had an younger sister by name Shanthi; when Shanthi was aged about 17 years, the accused -Mantri (respondent herein) married her without the consent of the complainant and the deceased and therefore they had grouse against the accused and they used to quarrel with them; according to the deceased and the complainant, the accused being the younger brother of the deceased, by abducting Shanthi and marrying her without the consent of the deceased and others has spoiled the name of the family of the deceased; accused had even threatened and warned the deceased with dire consequences if he intervenes in his family affair; subsequently, the accused used to quarrel with the deceased as well as with the complainant whenever he used to see them.

(3.) IN order to prove its case, the prosecution in all examined 12 witnesses and got marked 15 Exhibits and 7 Material Objects. On behalf of the defence, no witness is examined. As aforementioned, the trial Court convicted the accused -respondent herein for the offence punishable under Section 326 of IPC and acquitted him of the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC.