IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
K. SOMASHEKAR, SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR, JJ.
Muniraju S/o Narayanappa – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1335 of 2018
Decided On : 04-07-2022
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 302, 307, 324 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 209, 313 – Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 3, 134 – Punishment for murder – Attempt to murder – Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means – Expedite the trial of sessions case – Power to examine the accused – Summoning of witnesses – Appeal is directed against judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by Court of III Addl – District and Sessions Judge, Kolar in S.C. No. 147/2016 whereby held conviction against accused for offences under Sections 302 and 324 of IPC, 1860 and held that accused shall undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine for offence under Section 302 of IPC and he shall undergo imprisonment for one year for offence under Section 324 of IPC and shall pay fine with default clause – Held, Therefore, it is said that essential ingredients of Sections 302 and 324 of IPC, 1860 has been established by prosecution by facilitating evidence of PW-1/ who is the injured as well as wife of deceased and so also evidence of PW-2/ who is the grandson , who had also sustained with injuries from hands of accused – Prosecution has facilitated cogent, consistent, corroborative and positive evidence to probabilise that accused had committed murder of deceased who is none other than father of this accused – Involvement of deceased in other activities such as illicit relationship with sister, cannot be a ground for interference of judgment of conviction or order of sentence rendered by Trial Court - In instant case, even on re-appreciation of the evidence and also re-visiting the impugned judgment of conviction, Court do not find any perversity or absurdity relating to appreciation of evidence by Trial Court – Appeal rejected.
JUDGMENT :
K. SOMASHEKAR, J.
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the Court of III Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Kolar (sitting at KGF) in S.C. No. 147/2016 dated 13.04.2018 whereby held conviction against the accused for the offences under Sections 302 and 324 of IPC, 1860 and held that accused shall undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/- for the offence under Section 302 of IPC and he shall undergo imprisonment for one year for the offence under Section 324 of IPC and shall pay fine of Rs. 3,000/- with default clause.
2. In this appeal the appellant is seeking intervention of the impugned judgment of conviction by consideration of grounds as urged in this appeal and consequently, set-aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence rendered by the trial Court in respect of the aforesaid offences and to acquit the accused for the charges levelled against him.
3. Heard learned counsel Sri N.S. Sampangiramaiah for appellant/accused and Smt. Rashmi Jadhav, learned HCGP for State. Perused the judgment of conviction rendered by the trial Court.
4. The factual matrix of the appeal are as under:
5. In the first information statement at Ex.P1 it is alleged that Smt. Rathnamma is the second wife of deceased. One late Smt. Jayamma was first wife of deceased and she had one son and a daughter by name Muniraju who is the accused and Smt. Venkatarathna. The said Smt. Venkatarathna died and the accused was residing at Araluru Village, near Bengaluru with his wife and children and he was running Auto Rickshaw. Smt. Rathnamma gave birth to three sons and one daughter and among them her sons died and her daughter Smt. Saraswathi who is CW-8 was given in marriage to a person of Malaganahalli of Srinivasapura Taluk and since the husband of said Smt. Saraswathi was murdered about 5 to 6 years back, said Smt. Saraswathi and her two sons by name Kum. Charan - CW-2 and Kum. Dhanush - CW-3 returned back to the house of Smt. Rathnamma and her husband Sri Narayanappa at Pakarahalli village, Bangarpet Taluk. That about one week back prior to 8.7.2016 the accused - Muniraju came to Pakarahalli Village, Bangarpet Taluk and stayed in the house of Smt. Lakshmidevamma - CW-4 who is the sister of deceased Narayanappa. The accused - Muniraju used to demand his father deceased Narayanappa to effect partition and to allot share to him. In this regard panchayath was held on 08.07.2016 at about 9.00 a.m. near Hudukula Gate and in the said panchayath village leader by name Sri Nagarajappa and others were present. Subsequently, on the same day i.e. on 08.07.2016 at about 4.00 p.m. when Smt. Rathnamma and her grand sons Kum. charan and Kum. Dhanush and deceased - Narayanappa were in the house of Pakarahalli village, Bangarpet Taluk, accused came to said the place and abused deceased - Narayanappa saying that he would kill said Narayanappa since he refused to give share in the property. At that time CWs. 2 an
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.