RAMAKRISHNA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred by the appellant, being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and sentence held by the Trial Court in S.C.No.67 of 2011 dated 30.06.2012 for the offences punishable under Sections 302 , 201 and 498A of IPC, thereby sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default to pay fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC, and further to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/-, and in default to pay fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year for the offence punishable under Section 201 OF IPC and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default in payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year for the offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC and all the sentences were to run concurrently.

(2.) The brief facts of the prosecution case are that, on 22.11.2010 at about 7.30 p.m., the complainant Thungotappa had gone to Madhugiri Police Station and had filed a written complaint alleging that his daughter Vanajakshi was given in marriage to the accused. Subsequent to her marriage, she had begotten two children namely, Manjunatha aged five years and Indushree aged 1 1/2 years. It transpires that during her marriage, her parents had provided dowry in terms of cash in a sum of Rs.10,000/-, 10 grams of gold chain, a pair of ear studs and a pair of hangings apart from incurring the marriage expenditure. Subsequent to her marriage, the accused and the deceased had led a happy marital life. The accused was said to be working as a Watcher in the Forest Department. In order to get his posting permanent, he was in need of Rs.10,000/-. He started asking his wife Vanajakshi to bring the said amount from her parental home. Since she had refused, he had started tormenting her and picked up a quarrel with her for simple reasons and forcibly sent her to her parental home. He also started physically abusing her. On 13.11.2010, the accused harassed her physically and sent her to her parental home along with her two children. The complainant had in turn advised his daughter and send her back to her matrimonial house. Vanajakshi had tried to convince her husband saying that within 10 to 15 days the amount of Rs.10,000/- would be adjusted by her father. On 21.11.2010, at about 4.30 p.m., the accused had informed telephonically saying that his daughter Vanajakshi had committed suicide by hanging. After receipt of information about his daughter Vanajakshi, he rushed to Hosahalli. At about 5.30 p.m., he had reached the house of the accused. By the time, he noticed that the accused was not present in the house. As he entered into the house, seeing the dead body of his daughter Vanajakshi he observed that on the left side of her neck, some abrasion wound was there and her dead body was hanging in the kitchen tied with a nylon saree. The accused had spread the news all over the village that his wife had committed suicide by hanging. But however, on seeing the state of the complainant, he was very skeptical about her suicide and believed that she had not committed suicide but must have been killed by her husband. Hence, he lodged a complaint with the police. It is based upon the complaint filed by him the case in Crime No.152/2010 came to be registered by the Madhugiri Police by registering an F.I.R.

(3.) During investigation, the accused was apprehended and accused No.2 and accused No.4 were also apprehended by the police. Subsequently, investigation was taken up by the Investigating Officer who has laid the charge-sheet against the accused nos.1 and 2, who had faced trial for the alleged offences. The Trial Court framed the charge against the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Accordingly, the plea of the accused has been recorded wherein the accused who had faced trial for the offences under Sections 302 , 201 and 498A read with Section 34 of IPC.