Point of Law: Section 3 of the Evidence Act defines “evidence”, broadly divided into oral and documentary. “Evidence” under the Act is the means, factor or material, lending a degree of probability through a logical inference to the existence of a fact.

JUDGMENT :

This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence rendered by the II Addl. District and Sessions Judge at Tumkuru in SC.No.16/2016 dated 11.01.2017 whereby convicted the accused for the offence punishable under section 302 IPC, 1860 and sentenced to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-which is reflected in the operative portion of the order. Whereas the appellant is seeking to consider the grounds urged in this appeal and to set aside the judgment of conviction rendered by the trial court in so far as the offence under Section 302 IPC and consequently, to acquit the accused.

2. Heard the learned counsel Sri Veeranna G Tigadi for the appellant/accused and the learned Additional SPP for the State. Perused the judgment of conviction and order of sentence rendered by the trial court in SC No.16/2016.

3. The factual matrix of the appeal are as under:

On 17.08.2015 complainant namely Jayashankar filed a complaint before the New Extension Police Station, Tumakuru alleging that his daughter – Thejaswini was suffering from mental ill health and accused had come to his house and said that, he had fallen in love with her and was interested to marry his daughter. But complainant refused to get his daughter married with the accused as she was of unsound mind in terms of mental ill health. Deceased – Thejaswini forced the accused to marry her and gave the mobile phone to the accused. In view of that complainant – Jayashankar made altercations with the accused. It is further stated that on 12.08.2015 accused had come to the house of complainant at around 10.00 p.m. and extended life threat to him and deceased and also abused them in filthy language. Further, it is alleged that, accused decided to take away life of his daughter – Thejaswini. On 16.08.2015 at about 2.30 p.m. accused took the deceased to a dilapidated condition house and murdered her by strangulating her neck with means of veil.

4. In pursuance of the act of the accused, complainant filed complaint and criminal law was set into motion by recording FIR at Ex.P21. Subsequent to registration of crime the I.O took up the case for investigation and thoroughly investigation has been done and during investigation the I.O recorded the statements of witnesses and so also, drew mahazar in the presence of panch witnesses and thereafter laid the charge sheet against the accused before the committal court in C.C.No.171/2015 for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC, 1860. The committal Court had passed an order dated 12.01.2016 and the case was committed to Court of sessions for trial. Subsequent to committing the case in sessions Court, the case in S.C.No.16/2016 has been registered in the Court of the II Addl. District and Sessions Judge at Tumkuru. The Trial Court heard the learned Public Prosecutor and so also, the defence counsel for the accused relating to charge for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. On perusal of the material available on record there was sufficient material to frame charge against the accused and the charges were read over to the accused in a language known to him. But accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Accordingly the plea of the accused was recorded.

5. Subsequently, the prosecution let in evidence by subjecting to examination in all PW-1 to PW-12 and got marked several documents at Exhibits P1 to P21 and so also, got marked MO-1 to MO-8. Subsequent to closure of evidence on the part of the prosecution, the accused was subjected to examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C. relating to incriminating evidence appearing against him, whereby the accused denied the truth of the evidence of the prosecution. Subsequently, the accused did not come forward to adduce any defence evidence as contemplated under Section 233 of the Cr.P.C. Accordingly, it was recorded.

6. Subsequent to closure of evidence in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Cr.P.C. the Trial Court heard the arguments advanced by the learn