IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Discovery of factual aspects which led to recovery of any incriminating articles at instance of accused in consequence of information forms a conjoint sentence which cannot be bifurcated and it should be read as a whole.
(2) If prosecution proves case beyond reasonable doubt, and if motive is not proved, it is not fatal to prosecution.

JUDGMENT

K.N. Phaneendra, J.—The appellants who are arrayed as accused Nos.1 & 2 have challenged the judgment of conviction dated 7.5.2014 and the order of sentence dated 9.5.2014 passed by the Fast Track (Sessions) Judge-V, Bengaluru City, in SC No.1199/2012, and sentencing them to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence punishable under section 302 r/w Section 34 of IPC with a direction that they should not be released from the prison for the rest of their life.

2. The accused persons have individually preferred appeals. Accused No.1 Ranjith.K. @ Batta has preferred an appeal in Criminal Appeal No.471/2014, whereas the accused No.2 Bhuvanesh.T.P. @ Kutti has preferred an appeal in Criminal Appeal No.475/2014. Apart from the above said two appeals, the State has also preferred an appeal in Criminal Appeal No.766/2014 on the ground that the trial Court has imposed the sentence without making any order regarding fine, and sought for modification of the judgment and to impose fine on the accused persons for the offence punishable under section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC, as imposition of fine is mandatory under the above said provision.

3. As the above said three appeals are arising out of a common judgment passed by the trial Court, they are taken up together for consideration on merits.

4. We have heard the arguments of the learned Senior Counsel Sri Hashmath Pasha for the accused and the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor for the State. We have carefully perused and re-appreciated the oral and documentary evidence on record and also examined the correctness of the judgment of the trial Court.

5. Before adverting to the grounds urged before this court by the respective counsels, we feel it just and necessary to have the brief factual matrix of the case.

6. It is the case of the prosecution that, accused No.1 Ranjith fell in love with deceased Divya D/o. P.Shyam, R/o.No.317, 1st B.Main, N.S. Palya, BTM II Stage, Bengaluru-76. It appears, sometime prior to the incident, some marriage talks were taken place with reference to the marriage of PW-8 Pradeep with the deceased Divya. In that context accused No.1 was not happy and he in fact threatened PW-8 over phone informing him that, he has been loving Divya for more than 4 years and he would like to marry her etc., and also threatened PW-8 to take care of himself other wise, he would do something later. In this background, it appears, Divya was not interested towards accused No.1 and started avoiding accused No.1. Therefore, this was the motive projected by the prosecution that accused No.1 has decided to do away the life of the deceased Divya. Therefore, he joined hands with his friend accused No.2 in order to help him to do away with the life of the deceased Divya. In this background, it is alleged that, on the day of the incident that was on 28.5.2012 at about 6.30 p.m., when Divya after completing her work in a company in which she was working, was returning to her house she was attached and assaulted by accused No.1 with lethal weapon by causing serious injuries. In fact, she had informed earlier to her father about the conduct of accused No.1 that accused No.1 had snatched her mobile phone and she was scared of accused No.1. For this reason, the father of deceased regularly used to accompany her to her work place/company and bring her back in the evening. On the day of the incident also, the said Divya had called her father at about 5.45 p.m., and requested her father to pick her from the office. As PW-2 Shyam was at Basavanagudi, he told her to go by bus on that day. In this context, the said Divya was proceeding to her house by walk in the 7th Main Road, BTM II Stage.

7. It is the further case of the prosecution that, taking advantage of the situation that the deceased was walking alone in the said road, accused Nos.1 and 2 came on a Splendor Motorbike bearing No.KA-51/Y-3188 and accused No.1 got down from the motor cycle and went behind Divya and assault