CHIDANANDA Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the accused before the Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge at Bengaluru in S.C. No. 985/2006, being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and sentence passed against him for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 and 397 of IPC, has preferred this appeal on various grounds.

(2.) Before adverting to the grounds urged before this court, it is just and necessary to bear -in -mind the brief factual matrix of the prosecution case. The first information was lodged by P.W. 7 -Shantaladevi, who is none other than the daughter of Smt. Parvathamma. The FIR discloses, that on 19.07.2006 in the morning at 9.45 am, a maid -servant by name Vanajamma (P.W. 1) working in the house of the deceased Parvathamma, situated at Muthurayaswamy Layout, Hulimavu, Bannerghatta Road, Bengaluru, came to P.W. 7 and informed her that mother of P.W. 7, Parvathamma was lying near a cot in her house at Hulimavu. Immediately P.W. 7 went to her mother's house, saw the dead body of her mother. She has observed some injuries on the neck of the deceased. She has also observed missing of two golden Bangles and One Golden Chain with a Dollar and one pair of golden ear -studs and two golden finger rings from the house of the deceased. On suspicion that somebody must have murdered her mother, she lodged a complaint seeking investigation by the police. The police after due investigation, submitted the charge sheet.

(3.) The charge sheet papers disclose the factual matrix that the accused was working as a car driver in the house of deceased Smt. Parvathamma. On 18.07.2006, he took the car of Parvathamma and left the car for repairs. On the same day between 9.15 pm. to 9.30 pm., the accused again went to the house of the deceased and demanded for a sum of Rs. 1,000/ -. As the deceased refused to pay the amount, the accused committed her murder by throttling her neck and thereafter committed theft of the gold ornaments in the house of the deceased worth Rs. 50,000/ -. During the course of investigation, the accused was arrested and those articles were recovered and the police have also seized the motor cycle of the accused. After thorough investigation, as the police found sufficient materials against the accused, laid charge sheet against him. The accused has been in custody since the date of his arrest. After committal of the proceedings, a case in S.C. No. 985/2006 was registered. As the accused pleaded not guilty for the charges framed under Ss. 302 and 397 of IPC, he was put on to face the trial.