IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU R DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1261/2022 BETWEEN:

SMT. PAVITHRA, W/O SATHISH BABU, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, SAMANAHALLI VILLAGE, SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU-562125.

PRESENT ADDRESS:

CTP NO.12327, DETAILED IN CENTRAL PRISON BENGALURU HOSA ROAD, ELECTRONIC CITY PARAPPANA AGRAHARA, BENGALURU-560100. … APPELLANT (BY SRI. MAHESH M.R., ADVOCATE)

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU-560001. … RESPONDENT (BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL, HCGP)

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 374(2)

OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND ORDER OF SENTENCE DATED 20.07.2021, PASSED BY THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT SIT AT ANEKAL, IN S.C.NO.5059/2014, CONVICTING THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 302 OF IPC.

THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON 16.02.2026, THIS DAY, THE COURT PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T

CAV JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH)

This appeal is filed against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 20.07.2021 passed in S.C.No.5059/2014, on the file of the III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District sitting at Anekal, for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and to acquit the accused.

2. The factual matrix of the case of the prosecution is that accused No.1 is the wife of P.W.1 and accused No.2 is the mother-in-law of P.W.1. Accused No.1 was admitted to N.R.Hospital situated at Attibele for delivery and she gave birth to a female child on 21.10.2013. P.W.1 had asked accused No.1 to come to the house after delivery and as accused No.1 did not come to the house of P.W.1, he had registered a case before the Sarjapura Police Station on 25.10.2013. The accused No.2 had appeared before Sarjapura Police Station and requested for two days time in order to settle the dispute. The accused No.2 was residing in a rented house. That on 26.10.2013 at about 10.00 a.m., accused No.1 had attempted to strangulate the 6 days old baby and as the child did not die, accused No.1 had smashed the baby to the floor and killed it. Inspite of having knowledge of the murder, accused No.2 did not disclose the said fact to anyone and attempted to screen accused No.1. Based on the complaint of P.W.1, case was registered and investigation was conducted and charge-sheet was filed against accused Nos.1 and 2. Having received the charge-sheet, cognizance was taken and charges were framed and the accused did not plead guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution in order to prove the case examined P.W.1 to P.W.16 and got marked the documents at Exs.P.1 to 11. The accused were subjected to 313 statement and denied the incriminating evidence. The accused did not choose to lead any evidence.

3. The Trial Court having appreciated both oral and documentary evidence available on record comes to the conclusion that the child died due to homicide and convicted accused No.1 for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and imposed life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-. In default to pay fine, accused No.1 shall undergo further imprisonment for 6 months. The accused No.2 was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 202 of IPC and to undergo simple imprisonment for 40 days and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/-. In default to pay fine, accused No.2 shall undergo further simple imprisonment for 1 month. The accused Nos.1 and 2 were entitled for set off under Section 428 of Cr.P.C. The accused No.2 shall be set at liberty if she deposits the fine amount of Rs.5,000/-, since she was in judicial custody for 40 days as under trial prisoner.

4. Being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and sentence, the present appe