Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 218
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
H.B.Prabhakara Sastry, Umesh M Adiga, JJ
The State of Karnataka Through Circle Inspector of Police Sullia Circle, D.K – Appellant
Versus
Ravi.V.P – Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 278 OF 2018
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Shri.P.Thejesh, HCGP
For the Respondents: Smt.Archana K.M., Amicus Curiae
The court found that the absence of motive does not negate culpability for murder when the evidence shows intentional killing, holding that actions demonstrating knowledge of lethal consequence must lead to a conviction under Section 302 IPC.
Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 378(1) and (3) - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 and Section 304(Part-II) - Appeal against acquittal of the accused for murder under Section 302 - Trial Court convicted accused under Section 304(Part-II) citing lack of motive and sudden provocation - High Court finds evidence of severe assault, strangulation and absence of other persons during incident; determines the death of Kamala was homicidal and establishes intention to kill - Decision reversed, convict under Section 302 IPC. (Paras 1, 66, 77, 84)
Facts of the case:
The accused, Ravi, and the deceased, Kamala, living together, went to work on an agricultural property. After a night of drinking, a violent confrontation occurred where Kamala was assaulted and left dead in their shed. The prosecution led circumstantial evidence indicating Ravi's guilt, including DNA links.
Findings of Court:
Strong evidence of motive, violent conduct, and provocation insufficient to absolve the accused from murder charge; High Court confirms conviction under Section 302 IPC.
Issues: The appellate court determined whether the evidence supported a conviction for murder or if provocation mitigated the offense.
Ratio Decidendi: The High Court determined that the standard of evidence was met for a murder conviction due to deliberate and extreme violence against the deceased, negating claims of provocation.
Result: Appeal allowed; the accused convicted under Section 302 IPC.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to the conviction under section 302 ipc (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. incident details from witness statements (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. points for trial court's consideration (Para 11 , 12 , 20 , 21) |
| 4. trial observations and findings (Para 13 , 14) |
| 5. prosecution arguments regarding evidence (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 6. conclusion on the accused's actions and intent (Para 69 , 70 , 82 , 83) |
| 7. motive and provocation in murder cases (Para 75 , 76 , 77 , 78) |
| 8. final judgment convicts under section 302 ipc (Para 84) |
JUDGMENT
1. The State has preferred this appeal under Section 378 (1) and (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure , 1973 (hereinafter for brevity referred to as 'the Cr.P.C.'), challenging the judgment dated 04.04.2017, passed by the learned V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dakshina Kannada, Mangalore, sitting at Puttur (hereinafter for brevity referred to as the 'Sessions Judge's Court') in S.C.No.55 of 2014, for convicting the accused under Section 304 (part - II) of the Indian Penal Code , 1860 (hereinafter for brevity referred to as ‘IPC’) instead of Section 302 of IPC.
2. Brief facts of the case of the prosecution are that, PW-1 Smt.Chanchalakshi W/o. Tejomaya has an agricultural land and house property at Alekkadi, Kodyakand of Murulya village of Sullya Taluk. PW-2 Monoppa has been serving as care taker cum coolie of the properties belonging to PW-1 stated above and he has been residing in a part of the house situated in the said land. PW-1 is permanent resident of Mangalore and whenever she has work at the agricultural land, she used to go to Alekkadi and if required, stay in the said house and after completion of the work she used to return to Mangalore.
3. PW-3 Devananda is brother of PW-1. On 29.12.2013 both accused and deceased i.e., Ravi and Kamala approached PW-3 seeking coolie work. PW-3 referred both of them to PW-1 to work in her house and land at Alekkadi after obtaining her consent. Accordingly both Ravi and Smt.Kamala went to Alekkadi on 29.12.2023 at about 4.30 p.m. and met PW-1 in the presence of PW-2. Both Ravi and Smt.Kamala agreed to work in the house and agricultural lands of PW-1. She told to them to keep their luggage in the shed situated near her house and stay in the said shed. PW-1 had also paid Rs.300/- to them for purchase of grocery items to prepare food for them. Both Ravi and Kamala went to Kaniyuru to secure groceries.
4. After completion of work at Alekkadi, PW-1 left to Mangalore.
5. Both accused and deceased went to Kaniyuru. They purchased grocery and came back to Alekkadi around 6.30 to 7.00 p.m. on 29th December 2013. PW-2 met them and enquired as to whether they had dinner and they told that they had dinner and they would sleep in the shed. Thereafter, PW-2 as usual went to his room situated inside the house of PW-1 and slept, around 8.30 to 9.00 p.m.
6. On 30th December 2013 at about 5.30 a.m. PW- 2 got up to feed the cattle. At that time, he saw that two persons were sleeping in the shed covering their body with bed-sheet. After putting the fodder to the cattle, PW-2 again went to sleep and slept in his room for some time. He got up around 6.15 a.m. to 6.30 a.m. and found that one had got up and another was still sleeping. He thought Smt. Kamala was still sleeping. He searched for Ravi and could not get him. Smt.Kamala covered her entire body with a bed-sheet. Thereafter, he called Kamala few times, but she did not respond. Since she was lady, PW-2 asked PW- 6, Smt.Asma to wake up deceased Kamala and PW-6 tried to wake-up her. After removing the bed sheet, covered on her face, she found that the said Kamala had sustained severe head injuries and lying in the pool of blood. She told the said fact to PW-2. PW-2 looking at the body found that she was dead and thought that the accused Ravi might have murdered her and left the said spot. Thereafter, around 7.00 a.m., he telephoned to PW-1 and informed about the incident and also requested her to
