SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2008 Supreme(SC) 1410

2008(6) Supreme 748
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From Karnataka High Court)
Arijit Pasayat, V.S. Sirpurkar and G.S. Singhvi, JJ.
Basavaraja & Ors. — Appellants
versus
State of Karnataka — Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1 of 2002
Decided on : 22-09-2008

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant :K. Rajendra Chowdhary, Sr. Adv., Rakesh K. Sharma, Advocates.
For the Respondent:Sanjay R. Hegde and A. Rohan Singh, Advocates.

Important Point
Casual framing of charge and examination under Section 313 of the Code is a disturbing feature.

Headnote:Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 313 – Casual framing of charge and examination u/s 313 deprecated. (Para 8)

       Facts of the case :

        1. On 30.4.1994 at about 1 p.m. the appellant herein had assaulted one Smt. Umadevi (the ‘deceased’) with an intention to cause her death, dragged her inside the cattle shed, where the accused No.2 poured kerosene oil on her person and accused No.1 set fire to her after lighting a match stick as a result of which, the said Smt. Umadevi sustained burn injuries and died. The incident in question took place in the house of the accused No.4.

        2. The deceased Smt. Umadevi had been married to the accused No.1. Accused No.l was not willing to lead a marital life with the deceased Smt. Umadevi on the ground that she was ugly to look at and was of unsound mind.

        3. The trial court ordered acquittal.

        4. In appeal filed by the State, the High Court felt that the evidence of PW 7 did not rule out the veracity of the evidence of PWs. 2 & 3. There was no serious contradiction between the evidence of PWs. 2 & 3 on one hand and PW 7 on the other. In the result the order of acquittal was set aside.

       Finding of the Court :

        High Court judgment cannot be sustained.

       Result : Appeal allowed.

Judgment

Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J. —

1. Challenge in this appeal is to the Judgment of a Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court setting aside the acquittal of the appellant as was recorded by learned Sessions Judge, Chitradurga in SC No.82 of 1994. The trial court had acquitted the appellants for charge of commission of offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the ‘IPC’).

2. The prosecution case in a nutshell is as follows :

On 30.4.1994 at about 1 p.m. the appellant herein had assaulted one Smt. Umadevi (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’) with an intention to cause her death, dragged her inside the cattle shed, where the accused No.2 poured kerosene oil on her person and accused No.1 set fire to her after lighting a match stick as a result of which, the said Smt. Umadevi sustained burn injuries and died. The incident in question took place in the house of the accused No.4. The deceased Smt. Umadevi had been married to the accused No.1. Thus, the accused No.1 is the husband of the deceased Smt. Umadevi. The accused No.3 Sarmangalamma had been married to the complainant-PW 1 Virupakshappa. Both the marriages were performed at the same place and at the same place. The accused No.l was not willing to lead a marital life with the deceased Smt. Umadevi on the ground that she was ugly to look at and was of unsound mind. Likewise, the accused No.3 Sarmangalamma was also not willing to live with the complainant PW. l practically on the same grounds. Many panchayats were held in this connection to bring cordiality between the above said two spouses. The accused Nos. 1 &, 2 are the brothers and accused No.3 is their sister. The accused Nos.4 & 5 are the parents of the accused Nos.1 to 3. The deceased Smt. Umadevi was the youngest sister of PW.2. Both PW1 and Al had refused to stay with their respective spouses and even police had been approached and the PSI of the local police station had persuaded them to settle the matter but nothing useful came out. All these accused persons were residing together in the same house. The deceased Umadevi had been telling to PW-3 Jayamma, the wife of PW.2, whenever she used to go to the house of Umadevi, that she was being ill-treated and assaulted by the accused on the ground that she was ugly to look at and was also of unsound mind. The deceased was also telling to her that she is not being provided with proper and adequate food in the house of her in laws. On the date of the incident, both PWs. 2 & 3 had gone to the house of the deceased at about 11 a.m. in the morning and when they tried to enter into the house, they were prevented from doing so. The accused persons A4 and A5 pushed them out of the house and the A1 and A3 had assaulted the deceased who was crying for help from inside the house. The accused No.5 had bolted the front door from inside. Thereafter both PWs.2 & 3 went near the cattle shed, on the northern side of the house and saw what was going on inside the house. The accused No. 3 told her brother accused No.2 to finish off the deceased and accordingly, the accused No.2 poured kerosene oil and the accused No.l set fire to her. The accused Nos.4 & 5 had abetted the other accused to finish off the deceased. The incident in question happened in the cattle shed of the house of the accused persons. The said house of the accused persons where the incident in question took place, was located in a very isolated place, away from the village habitation. The cattle shed was filled with smoke and the deceased fell on the ground after sustaining the burn injuries. On seeing this ghastly incident both PWs.2 & 3 went into the village habitation and requested the villagers to come to the house of the accused persons, but no one obliged them by saying that their relationship with the villagers is not good and cordial. Thereafter, both PWs.2 & 3 returned back to their village at about 10 p.m. and informed the said occurrence to all their relat












Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top