B. VEERAPPA, VENKATESH NAIK T
Rangaraju @ Vajapeyi, S/o. Kariyanna – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka, by Sira Police Station – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
B.VEERAPPA, J.
The appellant/accused filed the present Criminal Appeal against the judgment of conviction dated 09.08.2017 and order of sentence dated 14.08.2017 passed in S.C.No.82/2015 on the file of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tumakuru, convicting the him for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.50,000/-in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two years, and convicting for the offence punishable under Section 376 of Indian Penal Code and sentencing to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years with fine of Rs.25,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year.
I. FACTS OF THE CASE:
2. It is the case of prosecution that, P.W.1-Nagesh, brother of victim-deceased Rathnamma, filed complaint-Ex.P.1 dated 25.06.2015, stating that, he is permanent resident of Javanahalli, Kasaba Hobli, Sira Taluk, Tumakuru District. Rangappa and Rangamma are his parents. He is the elder son in the family. His elder sister-Lalitha is married. His younger sister-Rathnamma/victim, aged 21 years, completed her Bachelor Degree i
Ganga Bai vs. State of Rajasthan
M.K. Ranganathan vs. Govt. of Madras
Nana Keshav Lagad v. State of Maharashtra
Navtej Singh Johar vs. Union of India
Parmanand Kataria vs. Union of India
Prahlad vs. State of Rajasthan
Pt.Parmanand Katara, Advocate vs. Union of India and another
RBI vs. Peerless General Finance & Investment Co. Ltd.
Sharad Birdichand Sarda vs. State of Maharashtra
Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade v. State of Maharashtra
State vs. Mahender Singh Dahiya
Subhash Chand vs. State of Rajasthan
(1) Evidence is only to be weighed and not to be counted – It is essentially, for prosecution to decide as to how many witnesses are to be examined to establish its case on any particular point.(2) D....
The court affirmed the death sentence for brutal rape and murder, emphasizing the need for strong judicial responses to restore public trust and safety.
(1) Minor contradictions do not go to root of matter and destroy whole prosecution which is firmly made out against accused.(2) Protection guaranteed under Article 20(3) of Constitution of India does....
The court found the dying declarations credible, linking the accused's rape to the victim's suicide, justifying conviction under IPC Sections 376 and 306.
The dying declaration made by the deceased was voluntarily made and in a conscious state of mind, and it was supported by witness testimonies, medical and forensic evidence, leading to the conviction....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the necessity of proving the case beyond reasonable doubt, following proper procedures for recording confessions, and adhering to statutory prov....
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.