IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 342 OF 2022 (A)

BETWEEN:

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY POLICE INSPECTOR, KUVEMPUNAGAR POLICE STATION MYSURU CITY REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU - 01.

…APPELLANT (BY SRI. M.V. ANOOP KUMAR, HCGP.)

AND:

SRI. CHANDRASHEKHAR @

CHANDEGOWDA @ CHANDRU S/O KARIGOWDA, R/O RAMPURA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, CHANNAPATNA TALUK-562160, PERMANENT ADDRESS:

MENASINGANAHALLI VILLAGE, VIRUPAKSHIPURA, CHANNAPATNA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562159 …RESPONDENT (NOTICE NOT ORDERED IN R/O RESPONDENT.)

THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.378(1)(3) CR.P.C BY THE S.P.P FOR THE STATE PRAYING TO GRANT LEAVE TO APPEAL AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DATED 13.10.2021 PASSED IN S.C.NO.2472016 BY IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MYSURU, THEREBY, ACQUITTING THE ACCUSED NO.2 / RESPONDENT OF THE OFFENSES P/U/S 201 R/W 34 OF IPC AND ETC.

THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON 09.10.2025 AND COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER THIS DAY, THE COURT, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

CAV JUDGMENT

State has preferred this appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 13^th October 2021, passed in SC No.247 of 2016 by the IV Additional District & Sessions Judge, Mysuru, (for short “the trial Court”.)

2. Brief facts leading to this appeal are that, Kuvempunagara Police filed charge-sheet against accused 1 and 2 for offence punishable under Sections 302 and 201 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code.

3. It is alleged by the prosecution that accused No.2 used to give driving training to learners at the New Maruti Car Driving School. One Smt. Rakshita used to attend the driving classes and accused No.1 got acquainted with the said Rakshita. In order to meet illegal expenses like Horse race and for gambling, and with an intention to get the gold ornaments and cash, on 11^th March, 2016 at about 9:30 am when the said Rakshita was alone in her House, accused assaulted and committed murder of Rakshita by strangulating her. It is the further case of the prosecution that thereafter, the accused No.1 had stolen the cash and Gold tournaments and kept the dead body in a suitcase and by hiring a car proceeded towards Channapattana, there he secured accused No.2, and with a common intention, proceeded near Menasiganahalli, Karigudda and burnt the dead body. Thereby accused committed offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code.

4. On hearing charges, the trial Court framed charges against the accused for the offence is punishable under Sections 302 and 201 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. The same were read over and explained to the accused. Accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. To bring home the guilt of the accused, the prosecution, in all, examined 31 witnesses PWs1 to 31, marked 69 documents as Exhibits P1 to P69 and 57 Material Objects were marked as MOs1 to 57. During the course of the trial, accused No.1 reported to be dead and accordingly the appeal against accused No.1 was abated and the case was proceeded against accused No.2. Statement of the accused No.2 under Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded. Accused No.2 denied the evidence of prosecution witnesses, but he has not chosen to lead any defence evidence on his behalf. Having heard the arguments, trial Court acquitted the accused No.2. Being aggrieved by the Judgment of Acquittal, State has preferred this appeal.

5. Sri M.V. Anoop Kumar, learned High Court Government Pleader, would submit that the judgment of acquittal passed by the trial Court is illegal perverse, contrary to law, evidence and material on record. He would submit that on 12^th March 2016, PW1 lodged complaint stating that his wife Rakshita was missing. However, he has not mentioned anything about the missing of cash and gold ornaments, but the same has be