SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Kar) 772

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
B. Veerappa, S. Rachaiah, JJ.
Shivaprasad @ Shiva - Appellant
Versus
The State By Banasawadi Police - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 573 of 2019
Decided On : 17-05-2022

Advocates appeared:
Sri. B.A.Belliappa, Advocate, for the Appellant; Ri K. Nageshwarappa, HCGP, for the Respondent.

Headnote:

CRIMINAL APPEAL - CONVICTION - MURDER - SECTION 302 IPC - SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE - CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE - GOLDEN PRINCIPLES - IDENTIFICATION OF ACCUSED - RECOVERY OF STOLEN ARTICLES - MOTIVE - SECTION 27 OF THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 - APPRECIATION OF EVIDENCE - BENEFIT OF DOUBT.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant/accused was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Thulasi. The prosecution's case was that the accused, who was a driver under the deceased's husband, had gained her confidence and used to visit their house. On the date of the incident, the accused entered the house of the deceased, stabbed her on the neck and other parts of the body, and stole 905 grams of gold, cash of Rs. 7,000/- and a Nokia mobile belonging to her. The accused was arrested on 29.06.2008 and a knife-M.O.1 was seized from him. The trial court convicted the accused based on circumstantial evidence, including the testimony of eyewitnesses who saw the accused entering and leaving the house of the deceased, the recovery of the stolen articles from the accused, and the presence of a scratch injury on the accused's face, which was allegedly caused by the deceased during the scuffle. The accused appealed the conviction, arguing that the evidence against him was insufficient and that the trial court erred in convicting him based on circumstantial evidence.

Finding of the Court:

The High Court allowed the appeal and acquitted the accused of the murder charge. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was involved in the murder of the deceased. The court noted that the evidence against the accused was entirely circumstantial and that there were several discrepancies and omissions in the testimony of the prosecution witnesses. The court also found that the recovery of the stolen articles from the accused was not sufficient to establish his guilt, as there was no evidence to show that the articles were stolen from the deceased's house. The court further held that the presence of a scratch injury on the accused's face was not conclusive evidence of his involvement in the murder, as there was no evidence to show how the injury was caused. The court concluded that the prosecution had failed to establish a chain of circumstances connecting the accused to the murder of the deceased and that the accused was entitled to the benefit of doubt.

Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed the murder of the deceased? 2. Whether the trial court erred in convicting the accused based on circumstantial evidence?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was involved in the murder of the deceased. 2. The trial court erred in convicting the accused based on circumstantial evidence.

Final Decision: The High Court allowed the appeal and acquitted the accused of the murder charge.

JUDGMENT

1. The appellant/accused who has been in judicial custody since last 13 years has filed the present Criminal Appeal against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 19.03.2019 made in S.C.No.365/2009 on the file of the XXXII Additional City Civil and Sessions judge and Special Judge for CBI cases, Bengaluru (CCH-34), convicting the accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of T10,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months.

I. FACTS OF THE CASE:

2. It is the case of the prosecution that the deceased Thulasi, aged about 48 years was residing along with her son-P.W.3 and daughter-P.W.4, aged about 14 and 22 years respectively, at House No.8, 9th D Main, I Block, HRBR Layout, Bengaluru, within the jurisdiction of Banaswadi Police Station and her husband Ravishankar-P.W.5 being an Engineer was staying at Abudhabi. Initially, accused was driver under P.W.6-R.amaswamy, neighbour of the deceased, and as some differences arose between them, P.W.6 removed the accused from driver job. It is further case of the prosecution that at the time when accused was working under P.W.6, he gained confidence of the deceased and her husband, and used to visit their house. As the husband of the deceased was in abroad, the deceased Thulasi used to go to functions with the help of accused in his car. During such times, the accused had seen the jewels being worn by the victim and thereby he thought that the victim might be possessing much more jewels, as her husband was working in abroad and hatched a plan to steal the jewels when her children were not at home, so that he can live a happy life by purchasing a new car. When things stood thus, on 27.06.2008, realizing that the children of the victim had went to school and victim was alone at home, at 9.45 am, the accused entered the house of the victim, spoke confidently with her and took a knife from the kitchen room and stabbed her on the neck and other parts of the body. In the scuffle, the victim snatched the knife and attempted to assault the accused with the said knife. When the accused tried to escape, the knife came in contact with the left cheek of the accused and the accused sustained scratch injury on his left cheek. Thereafter, accused went to first floor of the house and took away 905 grams of gold kept in the godrej almirah, cash of Rs. 7,000/- and Nokia mobile belonging to the victim, and ran away from the spot. It is further case of the prosecution that as usual, on 27.06.2008, P.W.3-Master Akshay Kumar, son of the deceased, aged 14 years studying in 8th Standard and Urmila-P.W.4, daughter of the deceased, aged 22 years left for their school and college at about 7.30 am and the victim was alone in the house. Further, as usual, at about 4 or 4.30 pm, P.W.3/son of the victim returned home on his bicycle and rang the cycle bell. Usually, his mother used to come out of the house and open the gate to receive him. Since, even after ringing the cycle bell for 5 to 10 times, his mother did not come out, P.W.3 went inside the gate and peeped into the house through window and noticed that his mother was lying on the floor. He pushed the door and went inside the house and found that his mother's face was covered with a pillow. He noticed blood on the floor, near the neck and a blood stained blade on the other side of the body. He was under the impression that his mother was unconscious and therefore, poured water on her face. When there was no response, he went out screaming, to the neighbour house i.e., Smt.Ragamma/P.W.2 and explained her about his mother. Immediately, P.W.3 and PW.2 came to the house of the deceased and called the deceased but there was no response. Thereafter, P.W.2 came out of the house of the victim saying that she would inform the husband of the victim who was at Abudhabi. Thereafter, neighbours gathered at the spot and somebod

                    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                    1
                    2
                    3
                    4
                    5
                    6
                    7
                    8
                    9
                    10
                    11
                    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
                    supreme today icon
                    logo-black

                    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

                    qr

                    Scan Me!

                    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

                    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

                    whatsapp-icon Back to top