A conviction for murder cannot be sustained solely on the uncorroborated and improved testimony of interested witnesses when there exists significant delay in filing the complaint and material contradictions regarding the presence of eye-witnesses, thereby failing to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.374(2) CR.P.C PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN SC 39/2016, 236/2016 AND 356/2016 ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, MYSURU AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION PASSED THEREON ON 25.06.2018 AND SENTENCE DATED 28.06.2018 PASSED IN S.C.NO.39/2016, 236/2016 & 356/2016 BY II ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE, MYSURU, APPLICABLE TO THIS APPELLANT IS CONCERNED AND ACQUIT THE APPELLANT FOR THE OFFENCE WITH WHICH APPELLANT IS CONVICTED AND SENTENCED.

THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ)

The Judgment and Order dated 25/28.06.2018 passed by the Court of II Additional Sessions Judge, Mysuru, in SC Nos.39/2016, 236/2016 and 356/2016 insofar as convicting accused Nos. 1 to 4, is assailed in these appeals.

2. Vide impugned judgment, the trial Court has convicted accused Nos.1 to 3 for the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w Section 34 of IPC and accused No.4 for the offence punishable under Section 120-B r/w 302 IPC, 114 r/w 302 IPC and 201 of IPC.

3. Crl.A.No.1450/2018 is preferred by accused No.1, Crl.A.No.1382/2018 is preferred by accused Nos.2 and 3 and Crl.A.No.1451/2018 is preferred by accused No.4.

4. We have heard the learned Senior counsel Sri.Tomy Sebastian appearing for the appellants in Crl.A.No.1450/2018 and Crl.A.No.1451/2018 and the learned counsel Sri Raju C.N., for the appellant in Crl.A.No.1382/2018 and the learned Additional SPP Smt. Rashmi Jadhav for the State. Perused the evidence and material on record.

5. Brief facts of the prosecution case:

Accused No.4-Geetha is the wife of deceased Kumar. There was an illicit relationship between accused No.4 and accused No.1. Hence, accused No.4 conspired with accused No.1 to commit the murder of her husband Kumar. In furtherance of the said conspiracy and at the instigation of accused No.4, on the intervening night between 17.02.2015 and 18.02.2015, at about 01.00 a.m., in front of the house of deceased Kumar, situated at Bidaragudu Village, with a common intention of committing the murder of Kumar, accused No.1 strangulated him with a cycle chain while accused Nos.2 and 3 held him and committed his murder. Further, accused Nos.4 to 19 who were legally bound to give information regarding commission of the offence, intentionally omitted to give such information to the police and burnt the dead body with an intention to cause disappearance of evidence and to screen the offenders namely accused Nos.1 to 4 from legal punishment.

6. Charges were framed under Section 302 r/w 34 of IPC against accused Nos.1 to 3, 120B r/w 34 of IPC against accused Nos.1 and 4, 302 r/w 114 IPC against accused No.4, 176 and 201 IPC against accused Nos.4 to 19.

7. Insofar as the charge framed under Section 176 IPC against accused Nos.4 to 19, the same was quashed by this Court. Hence, the trial Court proceeded against the accused in respect of other charges framed against them.

8. In order to establish the charges leveled, the prosecution in all examined 12 witnesses and got marked 25 documents and MO1. The defence got marked Ex.D1 to Ex.D5.

9. Vide impugned judgment, the trial Court was pleased to acquit accused N