N SHIVAKUMAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: KARNATAKA)
STATE OF KARNATAKA
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.)This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court of Karnataka dated 12.1.2001 in criminal appeal no. 83/97, confirming the conviction of the appellant by the learned additional sessions judge, bangalore rural district, Bangalore in S. C. no. 12/88 for the offence under section 302 IPC and the sentence unposed to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of rs. 5000/-, in default of which to undergo simple imprisonment for six months.
(2.)The case of the prosecution is that: the accused who got married to the deceased, the sister of PWs 1 and 2 six years prior to the date of occurrence, that they were blessed with a female child three years thereafter, who, unfortunately got affected with polio, that the accused has often been picking up quarrel with his wife for being not in a position to conceive for another child, that on such pretext, the accused was often quarrelling with his wife for getting her consent and also clearance from her brothers to get married for the second time and on the fateful day, when he alone was in the house with her, committed murder by throttling. On the next morning, i. e. , 8.12.1987 at about 5.30 a. m. , he seems to have informed pw-3, the neighbour that he found his wife's body too cold and not responding to calls. Thereafter, it appears PW-3 went and verified and found the wife of the accused dead with some black marks on her neck. The case of the prosecution further proceeds that the accused in a fear stricken condition met pws. 1 and 2 and virtually confessed to pws. 1 and 2 about the killing of his wife by throttling her neck since he was not getting clearance for his second marriage and also endeavoured to settle the matter amicably to avoid driving the matter to the police. This could not materialise and on a complaint given to the police at 9. 00 a. m. by PW-1 to the officer incharge of police station doddaballapura as per. Exhibit P-1, investigation has been conducted and the appellant had been charged for the offence under section 302 IPC for the murder of his wife.
(3.)After trial and examination of prosecution witnesses PW-1 to PW-7, including the doctor PW-6, who conducted the postmortem examination and after questioning the accused under section 313 Cr. P. C. , the learned trial judge came to the conclusion that it is the accused who committed the murder of his wife on the night of 7.12.1987 and that the prosecution was able to substantiate the charge under section 302 IPC beyond reasonable doubt for which ultimately the learned sessions judge convicted him and imposed the sentence, as noticed earlier. The accused pursued the matter on appeal before the High Court. The learned judges of the division bench, as could be seen from the judgment under challenge, have not only elaborately considered all the points raised for the accused but have extensively adverted to the evidence on record and appreciated and re-appreciated the evidence independently and ultimately concurred with the reasons as well as the findings recorded by the learned sessions judge convicting the accused for the murder of his wife. The appeal consequently came to be dismissed. Hence, this appeal.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.