Back
Anusuya @ Hampi W/o. Sri. A. M. Manukumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka, The Kestur Police Rep. by the State Public Prosecutor – Respondent
The evidence in the document indicates that the presence of accused Nos.1 and 2 at the scene of the crime was established through eyewitness testimonies, which described how they opened the door and were present when the dead body was found beneath the cot in their house (!) (!) . The witnesses also stated that the accused kept quiet and restrained others from searching the bedroom, suggesting their awareness and presence at the scene during the relevant time (!) (!) .
Regarding accused Nos.3 to 5, the document states that they participated in the crime as part of the criminal conspiracy, supported accused Nos.1 and 2, and were present in the house during the incident (!) (!) . The evidence suggests that they were involved and present at the scene, although the trial court acquitted them of the charges, the record supports their presence at the location during the commission of the offence.
In summary, the evidence sufficiently proved the presence of accused Nos.1 and 2 at the scene, and also indicated that accused Nos.3 to 5 were present during the relevant time period, supporting their involvement in the crime.
JUDGMENT :
K SOMASHEKAR, J.
This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence rendered by the trial Court in S.C.No.47/2011 dated 06.08.2016 convicting accused Nos.1 and 2 for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of IPC, 1860. Further, acting under Section 235(1) of Cr.P.C. the trial Court acquitted accused Nos.1 and 2 for the offences under Sections 143, 120-B of IPC. Insofar as accused Nos.3 to 5 is concerned, the trial Court acquitted them for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 120-B, 302, 201 r/w 149 of IPC. Hence, this appeal is filed by accused Nos.1 and 2 challenging the judgment of conviction and order of sentence urging various grounds and seeking intervention of the judgment of conviction rendered by the Trial Court and consequently, to set aside the judgment of conviction rendered by the Trial Court and consequent upon setting aside the impugned judgment, to acquit the accused for the offences under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC.
2. Heard learned counsel Sri Basavaraju.P. for appellants / accused Nos.1 and 2 and so also, learned Addl.SPP for respondent – State. Perused the impugned judgment of conviction and order of s
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
