LAWS(KAR)-2018-4-56

JAYAPADMA, W/O NARASIMHA MURTHY Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY PAVAGADA POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Decided On April 13, 2018
Jayapadma, W/O Narasimha Murthy Appellant
V/S
State Of Karnataka By Pavagada Police Station, Represented By State Public Prosecutor Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Criminal Appeal No.201/2013 is preferred by the accused, whereas Criminal Appeal No.535/2013 is filed by the State being aggrieved by the judgment and order of conviction & sentence, dated 30.8.2012, passed by the 5th FTC at Madhugiri in SC.No.177/2011.

(2.) Brief case of the prosecution is that on 4.8.2010, accused Smt.Jayapadma went to the Police Station and filed a complaint stating that she married about seven years back with one Narasimha Murthy; when she had been to Pavagada Government Hospital with her motherin- law, they found one female child left abandoned and by seeing the same, her mother-in-law asked her to take the child to their home; subsequently, she begotten male children out of the wedlock; the said abandoned child was named as Chaitra; two years thereafter the said Chaitra was admitted to Vidyabharathi Convent at Pavagada and she was studying in UKG at the time of incident. It is further stated in the complaint that on 4.8.2010, she left the said Chaitra to the said school at about 10.00 a.m. and came back to her house; at about 10.30 a.m., the Head Master of the school sent words to the accused that the Chaitra's bag was found in the school premises, but she was not found there; immediately thereafter she rushed to the school and found that Chaitra was murdered by somebody by smashing her face and head; dead body of the deceased Chaitra was found without there being any clothes except underwear. On the basis of the said complaint, a case was registered by Pavagada Police in Crime No.105/2010. During the course of investigation it revealed that the complainant herself is the accused.

(3.) In order to prove its case, the prosecution in all has examined 14 witnesses as PWs.1 to 14 and got marked the documents at Exs.P1 to P41 and also got marked Material Objects MO.Nos.1 to 8. However, accused has not led any evidence on behalf of her.