J M KRISHNA NAIK Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Crl.A.No.100198/2014 has been preferred by accused No.1/appellant and Crl.A.No.100199/2014 has been preferred by accused No.4/appellant challenging the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the I Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Ballari, in S.C.No.26/2012 dated 26.07.2014.

(2.) We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants as well as Additional State Public Prosecutor.

(3.) Brief facts of the case as per the case of the prosecution are that accused No.4 and deceased were husband and wife. Accused No.1 while working as a mason, he came in contact with accused No.4 and they developed illicit relationship. Accused No.4 abetted accused No.1 to eliminate deceased Sanna Kariyappa as he has become an obstacle for their illicit relationship. With the help of accused Nos.2 and 3, they conspired and when a "Seemant Karya" function was fixed on that day accused Nos.1 to 3 purchased the cool drinks-7-Up and by mixing sleeping pills in the said cold drinks administered the same to the deceased and when the deceased Sanna Kariyappa went to sleep in the house of sister of accused No.1 in Janata Plot on that night accused Nos.1 to 3 caused the death of the deceased Sanna Kariyappa by strangulating and kicking to his tastacles while he was fast asleep and thereafter accused Nos.1 to 3 took the dead body on a motor cycle of accused No.1 in to Reserved Forest of Hosalli near Siddapur and threw the dead body and by pouring the petrol burnt the body. The said fact was noticed by PW19 and he informed the said fact to PW1. PW1 in-turn filed the complaint as per Ex.P1. On the basis of the complaint, Police investigated the case and filed the charge sheet as against the accused Nos.1 to 4. Thereafter, the learned Magistrate took the congnizance by following provisions under Section 207 of Cr.P.C. The said case has been committed to the Sessions Court. Sessions Court took the cognizance and after securing all the accused Nos.1 to 4 and after hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties and the Public Prosecutor prepared the charge and was read over and explained to the accused. Accused persons pleaded not guilty as they claimed to be tried.