IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

KALABURAGI BENCH

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA

AND

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.200089/2014

BETWEEN:

DEVINDRAPPA S/O NAGAPPA HOSMANI

AGE: 25 YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURE

R/O: HANMANALLI VILLAGE

TQ: SEDAM

DIST: GULBARGA - 585 222.

... APPELLANT

(BY SRI. VIRANAGOUDA BIRADAR A/W

SRI. BASAVARAJ KAREDDY, ADVOCATES)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

SEDAM POLICE STATION

THROUGH, S.P.P. HIGH COURT

... RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. PRAKASH YELI, ADDL. SPP)

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION

374 (2) OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE PRAYING TO

ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF

THE LEARNED III ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE, GULBARGA

DATED

23.06.2014

IN

S.C.NO.96/2013

AND

CONSEQUENTLY ACQUIT THE APPELLANT.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS

DAY,

JOHN

MICHAEL

CUNHA,

J.

DELIVERED

THE

FOLLOWING:

2

JUDGMENT

This appeal is directed against the judgment of

conviction dated 23.06.2014 and order of sentence

dated 26.06.2014 passed by III Addl. Sessions Judge,

Gulbarga in S.C.No.96/2013 convicting the appellant

(hereinafter referred as "accused") for the offence

punishable under Section 302 of IPC sentencing him to

undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of

Rs.20,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to

undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for two years.

02.

The charge against the accused is that on

29.12.2012

at

about

07.30

a.m.

in

front

of

Mogalamma's shop in Hanmanalli village, he assaulted

the deceased - Bhagawant with sickle on his right side

of neck and cut his throat causing instantaneous death

suspecting that the deceased was carrying an illicit

relationship with his wife.

3

03.

The FIR was registered based on the

complaint lodged by PW.1 - father of the deceased,

recorded by PW.11 - PSI of Sedam Police Station.

According to the prosecution after committing the

offence, the accused proceeded to the police station and

produced the weapon in the police station and it was

seized by PW.13 - Investigating Officer in the presence

of two panch witnesses. The medical opinion certified

that the deceased died due to cardio-respiratory failure

due to Neuro hemorrhagic shock as a result of cutting

the neck by sickle. The FSL report (Ex.P.14) certified

that the sickle - M.O.1 seized by the Investigating

Officer and clothes of the accused - M.Os.4 to 7 were

stained with 'B' group blood. Based on these findings,

the charge sheet was laid against the accused for the

offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC.

04.

The accused denied the charge framed

against him and faced trial. In order to prove its case,

4

the prosecution examined 13 witnesses. Amongst them

PWs.1 to 6 were examined as eyewitnesses to the

incident, but PWs.3, 4 and 5 failed to support the

prosecution case and they were treated as hostile.

PWs.7 and 8 were examined to prove the spot mahazar -

Ex.P.6, seizure panchanama - Ex.P.7 and seizure of

clothes panchanama - Ex.P.8. These witnesses partly

supported the prosecution case. PW.9 the Head

Constable carried the FIR to the Court. The Medical

Officer who conducted the postmortem on the dead

body of the deceased and issued P.M. Report (Ex.P.10)

was examined as PW.10. The PSI who registered the FIR

was examined as PW.11. PW.12 was the Head Constable

who showed the spot of offence for preparation of the

sketch. PW.13 was the Investigating Officer who

conducted the investigation and laid the charge sheet

against the accused.

5

05. Through these witnesses the prosecution got

marked 14 documents including the original complaint -

Ex.P.1, P.M. Report - Ex.P.10, FSL Report - Ex.P.14.

The weapon used for the commission of the offence,

namely the sickle was marked as M.O.1, bloodstain

clothes of the accused were marked as M.Os.4 to 7.

Relying on the evidence of PWs.1, 2 and 6,