Point of Law: It is settled law that evidence of hostile witness also can be relied upon to extent to which it supports prosecution version evidence of such witness cannot be treated as washed off record.

JUDGMENT :

The appeal in Crl.A.No.36/2016 is preferred by the appellant/accused and the connected appeals, namely Crl.A.No.248/2016 and also Crl.A.No.372/2016 have been preferred by the appellant/State respectively, challenging the impugned judgment rendered by the Trial Court in S.C.No.15054/2014 dated 23.09.2015.

By the said judgment, the Trial Court has convicted the appellant and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-with default cause for the offences punishable under Section 304 Part II of the IPC. The accused was further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two months and to pay a fine of Rs.200/-with default clause for the offences punishable under Section 177 of the IPC, 1860.

2. Crl.A.No.372/2016 is preferred by the State praying to set-aside the judgment of acquittal for offences under Section 302 of the IPC, 1860 and thereby praying to convict the accused for the offence under Section 302 of the IPC.

3. Crl.A.No.36/2016 has been filed by the appellant/accused seeking intervention of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence rendered in the aforesaid sessions case and thereby to acquit the accused of the offences punishable under Section 304 Part II of the IPC, 1860 and the offences under Section 177 of the IPC in respect of which she was convicted.

4. Crl.A.No.248/2016 has been preferred by the State seeking to allow the appeal and to modify the order of sentence imposed by the Trial Court and thereby to impose appropriate and adequate sentence against the accused in respect of the offences under Section 304 Part-II and Section 177 of the IPC, 1860.

5. In view of the fact that all these, three appeals arise out of the same impugned judgment rendered by the Trial Court, therefore, the appeals are heard and disposed of by this common judgment.

6. Heard the learned counsel Shri Deepak Narajji for appellant/accused in Crl.A.No.36/2016 and so also the counsel for the respondent/accused in Crl.A.No.372/2016 and Crl.A.No.248/2016. We have also heard the arguments of the learned Addl. SPP for the State in Crl.A.No.372/2016 and Crl.A.No.248/2016 and so also the Addl. SPP for the respondent in Crl.A.No.36/2016. Perused the impugned judgment rendered by the Trial Court in S.C.No.15054/2014 convicting the accused for offences punishable under Section 304 Part II of the IPC and so also for offences under Section 177 of the IPC, 1860.

7. The factual matrix of these appeals are as under:

It transpires from the case of the prosecution that the deceased Gangadharappa who is none other than the husband of accused Munirathnamma, was blessed with three sons. PW-13/Renuka who is none other than the wife of PW-8/S.V. Venkatesh were also residing in the same area nearby the house of the accused Munirathnamma situated at Sonnappanahalli village. The accused Munirathnamma and the deceased Gangadharappa were spouses and they were related to PW-13/Smt. Renuka, W/o. S.V. Venkatesh. They were mutually visiting each others houses frequently, being related to each other. PW-13/Renuka and CW-12/Sunandamma and PW-11/Kasthuri were neighbourers residing near the house of the accused Munirathnamma. It is stated that all of them were addicted to bad vices by consuming alcohol and consumed the same even during the morning hours when the day commenced. It further transpires that on 04.09.2014, the deceased Gangadharappa was sleeping at home and accused Munirathnamma informed him to bring some provisions namely foodgrains for preparing food. Therefore, deceased Gangadharappa had left the house by informing the accused Munirathnamma saying that he would collect the money from his employer to bring foodgrains. At around 9.30 a.m., the accused Munirathnamma had got some information from CW-12/Sunandamma that the deceased Gangadharappa was present in the house of PW-13/Renuka and further that both of them were found sleeping together in bed in a compromising position. On rece