SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 11306

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
H.P.Sandesh, B. Muralidhara Pai, JJ
Vishwanath – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
CRL.A No. 100496 of 2023



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: A.R. Patil
For the Respondents: M.B GUNDAWADE

The exception of grave and sudden provocation under Section 300 of the IPC is not applicable where the accused inflicts multiple fatal injuries with a deadly weapon, indicating a clear, sustained intent to kill rather than a momentary loss of self-control.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302 and 307 - Murder and Attempt to Murder - Conviction based on testimony of injured eye-witnesses - Principle of grave and sudden provocation under Exception to Section 300 - Applicability - Accused caused 19 chop wounds to the victim - Trial Court rightly rejected argument of provocation based on prior conduct of accused - No basis for reduction of sentence as intent to kill was clearly established by the nature and volume of injuries. (Paras 15, 17)

(B) Evidence - Child Witness - Testimony - Need for scrutiny - Testimony should be reliable and not tutored - If inconsistent or tutored, it cannot be the sole basis for conviction; however, evidence can be supplemented by other credible eye-witness accounts. (Para 15)

(C) Victim Compensation - Criminal Procedure Code - Section 357(A) - Duty of Trial Court - Minor victims of crime are entitled to state-sponsored compensation - Courts should not burden minors by requiring them to file applications but should direct the Legal Services Authority to initiate the process for award of compensation. (Para 18)

Facts of the case:
The accused, suspecting his wife's fidelity, inflicted multiple chop injuries on her and also injured the complainant (his mother-in-law) when she intervened, leading to the wife's death. The Trial Court convicted the accused under Sections 302 and 307 of the IPC.

Findings of Court:
The court sustained the conviction, noting the consistency of the injured witness and the brutality of the injuries (19 chop wounds) which negated any claim of sudden provocation.

Issues: Whether the Trial Court erred in its conviction and if the case could be mitigated under the Exceptions to Section 300 of the IPC.

Ratio Decidendi: An accused who inflicts repeated fatal injuries with a deadly weapon cannot invoke the 'grave and sudden provocation' exception under Section 300 when their conduct reflects clear premeditation and absence of loss of self-control.

Result: Appeal dismissed; Trial Court's conviction and sentence confirmed.

Table of Content
1. factual background of the assault and procedural history of the conviction. (Para 3 , 4)
2. defendant counsel's arguments regarding provocation and misinterpretation of evidence. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
3. prosecution counter-arguments regarding the brutality of acts. (Para 10 , 11)
4. court's analysis of witness credibility and rejection of provocation plea. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17)
5. final order affirming conviction and directing compensation for minor children. (Para 18)

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/SEC. 374(2) OF CR.P.C. (415(2) OF BNSS-2023) SEEKING TO ALLOW THE CRIMINAL APPEAL AND TO SET ASIDE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF CONVICTION DATED 21.10.2022 AND SENTENCE DATED 27.10.2022 PASSED BY THE IV ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DHARWAD IN S.C.NO. 154/2019 IN PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 302, 307 OF IPC AND ACQUIT THE APPELLANT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FURTHER ARGUMENTS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. MURALIDHARA PAI

ORAL JUDGMENT

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

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and also the learned Addl. SPP appearing for the respondent/State.

2. This appeal is filed against the judgment of conviction dated 21.10.2022 and order of sentence dated 27.10.2022 passed in SC No.154/2019 by the learned IV Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad (for short, ‘Trial Court’) for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 307 of IPC and prays this Court to acquit the accused.

3. The factual matrix of case of the prosecution before the trial Court is that the complainant by name Devakka, mother of the victim, lodged a complaint stating that she had performed the marriage of her daughter 7 years back with the accused and in the said wedlock, both of them having three children. The accused, who is the son-in-law of PW1, was suspecting the fidelity of the victim and was ill-treating and assaulting her without any reasons. Hence, the daughter of PW1 came and settled in her house. But in view of the intervention of elders of the village, advised the accused and inspite of it, he continued the ill-treatment on the victim. That on 15.05.2019, the accused went to Kalakeri and sought permission to take his wife and children to his village Shalavadi, as there is Guru Shanteshwara Jatra in the village and accordingly, the complainant (PW1) along with her daughter and grandchildren went to Shalavadi. On the same day, after having dinner at around 10 o'clock, the complainant and her grandchildren had slept in front of the house and her daughter Smt.Lakshmi and son-in-law i.e. accused had slept in the room inside the house. After sometime, the complainant's daughter Smt.Lakshmi came out of the house with hue and cry; at that time, the accused followed her with chopper in his hand and abused her in a filthy language and with an intention to kill her, inflicted the injury on her neck, head and hand and caused the grievous injuries. When the complainant went to rescue her daughter, the accused also assaulted the complainant with the same weapon on her neck and hand and caused grievous injuries. On hearing the hue and cry, the neighbours came and pacified the dispute and at that time, the accused ran away from the spot. Later, the persons gathered there, shifted both the injured to the government hospital for treatment. The said Lakshmi died in KIMS Hospital, Hubli, due to severe injuries sustained by her. Based on the complaint of PW1, the police had registered the case at the first instance for an offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC and thereafter, invoked Sections 302 and 504 of IPC.

4. The law was set in motion based on the complaint of PW1 in registering the Crime No.61 of 2019 and the IO conducted the investigation and filed the charge sheet and on filing of the charge sheet, case was registered as CC and thereafter matter was committed to the Sessi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top