JUDGMENT

Chidananda Ullal, J. — In this case, the case of the prosecution is that, the accused’s wife died a homicidal death by strangulation.

2.The learned Additional State Public Prosecutor Sri N.V. Prakash argued that there is no eyewitness to the incident and as such, the prosecution had proved the case only by circumstantial evidence. According to him, the circumstances are that the wife of the accused was taken away by him from the house of her sister Bhavani on the day previous, with the presentation to her that he was taking the deceased to his village and thereafter, he had returned to the house of the said Bhavani alone. On enquiry, by the said Bhavani, he told her that the deceased who was in his company was missing in Tumkur bus stand.

3.According to the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor, the circumstantial evidences are as follows:—

1.That the deceased was in the company of her husband and she was seen last in the company of her husband in the house of Bhavani;

2.That the body of the deceased was found on the railway track in between Tiptur and Honnavalli. The last seen theory was proved by the prosecution by examining P.W. 13-Siddarama, the husband of Bhavani