IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
K. SOMASHEKAR, M.I.ARUN, JJ.
Shilpa W/o. Vivek Meharwade and Ors – Appellant
Versus
The State of Karnataka and Ors – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.100183 of 2018 (C)
Decided On : 24-03-2021
Criminal Procedure Code,1973 - Sections 374(2),313, 233 154 , 114, 41(l)(a), (g) and 374(2) - Indian Penal Code,1860 - Sections 302, 201 read with Section 34 - Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 24, 114 and 3 Offence of murder – Examination of accused – Appeal against conviction - Further held that both accused i.e., accused Ncs.l and 2 are sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and shall pay fine - same has been challenged under this appeal by urging various grounds and also seeking for allowing of appeal by setting aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence rendered Dy Trial Court against accused - prosecution is comoiainant is none other mother of deceased.
Finding of the court:
Court are of opinion prosecution has not been established guilt against the accused with beyond all reasonable doubt for securing the conviction – Evidence are found to be camouflage and also to be clumsy on the part of prosecution entire case of prosecution is revolving around circumstantial evidence - clouds of doubt arise prosecution evidence and this benefit shall be extended to accused alone as according to the doctrine of criminal justice delivery system.
Result: – Ordered Accordingly.
JUDGMENT :
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the Court of I-Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Bagalkot to sit at Jamakhandi (for short “the Trial Court”) in S.C. No.17/2017, dated 11th January 2018, whereby the Trial Court held conviction for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 read with Section 34 of IPC. It is further held that both the accused i.e., accused Nos.1 and 2 are sentenced to undergo imprisonment for the life and shall pay fine of Rs.50,000/- each for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC and also sentenced to undergo imprisonment for seven years and shall pay fine of Rs.25,000/- each for the offence punishable under Section 201 read with Section 34 of IPC. The same has been challenged under this appeal by urging various grounds and also seeking for allowing of the appeal by setting aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence rendered by the Trial Court against the accused.
2. The factual matrix of the appeal that transpired in the case of the prosecution is that the complainant – Tungamma Yallappa Meharwade, who is none other than the mother of the deceased – Vivek Meharwade. The marriage of her son – Vivek was performed with one Shilpa D/o.Vittal Habib of Hubballi on 12.04.2004 as per the customs prevailed in their society. Subsequent to the marriage, they led happy marital life at Harihar and blessed with two children namely Rakshita and Abhishek, who are now aged about 11 years and 10 years respectively. About ten years back, the complainant’s husband Yallappa came to Mudhol and started oil business. Later, the complainant, her son – Vivek and daughter-in-law – Shilpa, who is arraigned as accused No.1 came to Mudhol and started residing there. In the year 2014, the husband of the complainant - Yallappa died due to heart-attack. The son of the complainant namely Vivek and his wife – Shilpa, who is none other than the daughter-in-law of the complainant were looking after the oil shop, which is situated at Mudhol. The daughter-in-law – Shilpa used to assault her husband namely Vivek and used to torture him and insisted him to send his mother i.e., the complainant– Tungamma from home. Accordingly, the complainant returned to Davanagere with a fond of hope that her son – Vivek and also his wife– Shilpa will live happily.
3. It is further stated that the daughter-in-law of the complainant i.e, accused No.1–Shilpa is moving freely with the neighboring shop owner namely Shri Mahadev resident of Mudhol and also another person by name Shri Ramanna, working in their shop. The said fact is within the knowledge of her son – Vivek. Her daughter-inlaw namely Shilpa engaged the said Ramanna in her shop to look after the affairs and directed her husband to work in other shop and the complainant asked her not to do so and remove said Ramanna, but her daughter-in-law not heeded her advice and she used to go to Belagavi and Vijayapur frequently.
4. On 14.10.2016 in the evening while he was in her house, the Circle Inspector of Police, Mudhol Circle namely Shri Sanjeev Kambale made phone call and told that your son Vivek is murdered and his dead body is in Mudhol graveyard/cemetery and asked to come there, as such she informed not to take any action until she arrives and the complainant along with her son – Anand and also her relatives came to Mudhol graveyard/cemetery on 15.10.2016 in the morning at 8:00 a.m. and in the graveyard/cemetery, wherein people gathered and the Police were also there. They found the body of Vivek lying there and his hands and legs were tied with plastic wire and emitting some foul smell and one bag was lying near the dead body at a distance and then they asked the watchman of the said cemetery and he told his name as Eknath Maruti Kadam, who told that on 14.10.2016 at about 12:00 p.m., while he was in graveyard/cemetery, two women folk came there and told that they will bring a body and if he b
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.