PUTTASWAMY ALIAS IKKAL RANGAIAH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the accused is directed against the judgement of conviction and sentence passed by the Fast Track (Sessions) Judge-III, Bangalore, dated 20. 03. 2004 in S. C. No. 418/2002, wherein the appellant-accused has been found guilty of having committed the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC, and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further imprisonment for a period of six months. The essential facts of the case leading up to this appeal with reference to the rank of the parties before the trial Court are as follows:-

(2.) IT is the case of the prosecution that Sakamma, daughter of lakshmamma and Kariappa, PWs. 1 and 2 respectively and sister of pw3-Gowramma was married to the accused and they had two children a son and a daughter. It is the further case of the prosecution that on 27. 09. 2001, the accused informed PW1 that their daughter-in-law was not well and took them to Tumkur and they reached Tumkur at 9:00 a. m. The accused took them to various places in Tumkur and was not found in any Hospital till 5 p. m. , and they searched for daughter-in-law of PW1 in Shimoga and thereafter, they went to kithagganahalli Village and saw their daughter-in-law, who was quite healthy. Thereafter, they returned to their village at 11:00 p. m. and when they got down from the Bus, the accused tried to assault sakamma and PW1, the mother of Sakamma tried to intervene and she was also assaulted by the accused and as a result, she sustained fracture of the bone in her left hand and thereafter, the accused went with his wife-Sakamma to his house and PW1 returned to her house and informed P W2 about the said assault. On the next day morning at about 5:30 a. m. , Police had sent some person to their house and pws. 1 and 2 went to the house of the accused and found the dead body of their daughter-Sakamma. There was a pillow and wooden club which were stained with blood near the dead body. PW1 lodged a complaint before the Police, which was registered by PW9 in Crime no. 419/2001 for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. Thereafter, inquest over the dead body was conducted and the dead body was sent for post mortem examination. PW10 conducted the post mortem examination on the dead body and issued the post mortem report as per Ex. P9 and after completing investigation, the charge-sheet was filed against the accused for the offence punishable under section 302 IPC by PW12. The case was committed to the Sessions court. The charge was framed against the accused of having committed the offence punishable under Section 3 02 IPC. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined pws. 1 to 12 and got marked the documents, Exs. P1 to PI3 and m. O. Nos. 1 to 6. The statement of the accused under Section 313 cr. P. C. was recorded. The defence of the accused is one of denial. The accused did not lead any defence evidence. The trial Court after considering the contentions of the Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel appearing for the accused and appreciating the evidence adduced by the prosecution, held that the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that he has committed murder of Sakamma and thereby, committed the offence punishable under Section 302 ipc. , and after hearing the accused and the counsel appearing for him, sentenced the accused to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further imprisonment for a period of six months, by judgement dated 20. 03. 2004. Being aggrieved by the said judgment of conviction and sentence, the accused is before this Court in this appeal.

(3.) WE have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned Addl. State Public Prosecutor appearing for the State.