JUDGMENT :

The State has preferred this appeal challenging the impugned judgment rendered by the Trial Court in S.C.No.185/2011 dated 05.08.2015 acquitting the appellant/accused for offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of IPC, 1860. This appeal is filed seeking to consider the grounds urged therein and to set aside the judgment of acquittal rendered by the Trial Court for the aforesaid offences and thereby to convict the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of IPC, 1860.

2. Heard the learned HCGP Smt. Rashmi Jadhav for the State and learned counsel Sri. A.N. Radhakrishna for the respondent/accused. Perused the judgment of acquittal in S.C.No.185/2011.

3. Factual matrix of the appeal is as under:

It transpires from the case of the prosecution that on 03.12.2010 the complainant Gangadharaiah who is none other than the father of the deceased Bhagyamma had lodged a complaint before the Dabaspet Police Station stating that his daughter Bhagyamma and the accused Girish were in love since two years. The accused had also promised to marry her and with her permission both accused and the deceased had a physical relationship from the past one year. Consequent to the physical relationship between the deceased Bhagyamma and the accused Girish, the deceased Bhagyamma became pregnant and she was 9 months pregnant. By intervention of the elderly persons such as CW.2 to 7, the deceased Bhagyamma and the accused Girish got married at Daninamma temple in the presence of the villagers. After 3 days of the marriage, the deceased Bhagyamma delivered a baby girl and they named her Shruthi. In pursuance of the murder of the deceased Bhagyamma and also her daughter Shruthi aged of 3 months, the Complainant Gangadharaiah had initiated criminal prosecution against the accused Girish by filing a complaint as per Ex.P13. The complaint was received by PW.22 K. Suresh who is a Police Sub Inspector who was subjected to examination and recorded an FIR as per Ex.P15. Subsequent to recording of FIR, the case was taken up for investigation by the Investigating Officer namely PW.21, who after completion of investigation thoroughly, recorded the statement of witnesses and also drew a mahazar as per Ex.P14 in the presence of panch witnesses and also secured the post mortem report as per Ex.P16 and such other material documents and laid a charge sheet against the accused before the Committal Court. Subsequently, the Committal Court had passed an order dated 27.05.2011 by committing the case to the Sessions Court for trial whereby the case was registered in S.C.No.185/2011. Subsequently the accused was secured to face trial by issuance of summons/process. The accused had engaged a counsel for his defence.

4. Subsequently the Trial Court on hearing the arguments advanced by the learned Public Prosecutor and the defence counsel, framed charges against the accused for the offences under Sections 302 and 201 of IPC, 1860. However, the accused did not plead guilty but claimed to be tried. Accordingly, plea of the accused was recorded separately.

5. Subsequent to framing of charge against the accused, the prosecution had subjected to examination in all PW.1 to PW.22 and got marked several documents at Ex.P1 to Ex.P17 but no material objects were got marked. Subsequent to closure of the evidence on the part of the prosecution, incriminating statement as contemplated under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. was recorded. Subsequently, accused were called upon to adduce defence evidence as contemplated under Section 233 Cr.P.C. But the accused did not come forward to adduce any defence evidence on their side.

6. Subsequent to closure of the evidence on the part of the prosecution as well as the defence side, the trial Court heard the arguments advanced by the learned Public Prosecutor and also the arguments of the learned defence counsel. On perusal of the entire evidence on record, the Trial Court rendered an acquittal judgment acquitting the appellant/accu