MANJA @ MANJUNATH S Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has preferred this appeal challenging the judgment of conviction dated 24.07.2015 and order on sentence dated 29.07.2015, passed by the learned II Addl.District & Sessions Judge, Davanagere, (hereinafter for brevity referred to as 'trial Court'), in S.C.No.150/2013, convicting him for the offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, (hereinafter for brevity referred to as 'IPC') and sentencing him accordingly.

(2.) The summary of the case of the prosecution is that the deceased Yashodamma was the wife of one Ganeshappa, who happens to be the uncle of the accused. Said Ganeshappa died about six years earlier to the death of Yashodamma. After his death, Yashodamma was residing in Harosagara Village, in her husband's house along with her two children. The accused was also residing in the said house along with Yashodamma. During that time, he developed intimacy with Yashodamma and he was having illicit relationship with her. Thereafter, the accused started to suspect the chastity of Yashodamma and he used to obstruct her from speaking with others. On 13.8.2013, in the evening, Yashodamma had been to Davanagere and returned to Harosagara village to her house at about 9.45 p.m. At that time, the accused had locked the door from inside, and he did not open the same, even though Yashodamma knocked the door several times. Thereafter, Yashodamma got opened the door with the assistance of her neighbour by name Girish. In this regard, after entering into the house, Yashodamma quarreled with the accused. Later, on the same day, in between 10.00 to 12.00 p.m., the accused committed murder of Yashodamma by throttling her neck forcibly. Hence, the police have filed charge sheet against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC.

(3.) Charges were framed against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. Since the accused pleaded not guilty, in order to prove the alleged guilt against the accused, the prosecution got examined twentytwo witnesses as PW-1 to PW-22 and got marked documents from Exs.P-1 to P-22 and material objects at MO-1 to MO-5. On behalf of the accused, neither any witnesses were examined nor any documents were got marked. After hearing both side, the trial Court by its impugned judgment of conviction dated 24.7.2015 and order on sentence dated 29.7.2015, convicted the appellant/accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced him accordingly. It is against the said judgment of conviction and order on sentence, the appellant/accused has preferred this appeal.