State Of Karnataka vs Srinivasa

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL Nos. 1496 of 2013

STATE OF KARNATAKA ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS

SRINIVASA ...RESPONDENT(S)

J U D G M E N T

R. BANUMATHI,J.

1. The appeal by the State of Karnataka is against

the acquittal of respondent-accused under section 302

IPC

2. Case of the prosecution is that A-1 was

allegedly having illicit relationship with second

accused (since dead). On account of which there was

alteration between A-1 (respondent) and the deceased

Rajashree (wife) and the accused no. 1 is alleged to

have strangulated the deceased to death. Relying upon

the medical evidence (PW-7) and the evidence of PW-8

(father of the deceased), the trial Court convicted

respondent no.1 under section 302 IPC and also Signature Not Verified sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment. Digitally signed by MADHU BALA Date: 2018.08.17 14:25:49 IST Reason: 3. Insofar as the second accused, the trial court

convicted her under Section 201 IPC and sentenced her

to undergo three years imprisonment. (Since accused 2

no. 2 – Padmavathi is dead, Criminal Appeal No. 1497

of 2013 of accused no. 2 – Padmavathi has already

been abated vide Court’s order dated 03.05.2016).

4. A-1 was running a power loom on the ground

floor of his house and the first floor was used for

his residence. The second accused was employed in the

power loom and was residing in the second floor. PW-8

and PW-9 (father and mother of the deceased) have

spoken about illicit relationship of A-1 and A-2 and

that illicit relationship led to frequent quarrel

between A-1 and the deceased- Rajashree. PW-5 opened

the door and found that the deceased hanging with the

telephone cable wire. On the date of occurrence –

05.01.2001 at about 4.30 p.m. the informant- P.W-8

(father of the deceased) got the information that the

deceased committed suicide. On the date of occurrence

05.01.2001 the deceased was found dead by hanging.

Based on the medical evidence and the evidence adduced

by the prosecution, the trial court convicted the

accused.

5. The High Court acquitted the accused mainly on

the basis of evidence of PW-7 (Doctor) who conducted

the post-mortem. In the cross examination, PW-7

(Doctor) has stated that it could be a case of suicide

as the ligature mark was not found on the neck. The

High Court in extenso referred to the evidence of PW-7

who stated that the ligature mark is anti-mortem in 3

nature and that if the death is caused by

strangulation and the body if put in hanging posture

there is every possibility of another ligature mark

around the neck. The P.M. report does not disclose the

presence of ligature mark around the neck. Based on

the evidence of PW-7 (Doctor), the High Court arrived

at conclusion that the “medical evidence does not

conclusively establish that it is a case of homicidal

death” and that the accused is entitled to benefit of

doubt.

6. Learned counsel appearing for the State of

Karnataka though made elaborate submissions on the

evidence of PW-8 and PW-9 -parents of the deceased and

also the medical evidence, we are unable to

countenance the submissions. When the doctor has given

opinion that the suicide cannot be ruled out and the

death of the deceased could have been due to suicide

which was accepted by the High Court; when the High

Court has a view which is a plausible view, we find

no good ground to take a different view. After

appreciating the oral evidence and medical evidence,

the High Court acquitted the accused. In view of

above, we do not find any compelling reason or

substantial ground to interfere with the order of

acquittal.

4

7. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.

….......................J. [ R. BANUMATHI]

…......................J. [VINEET SARAN] NEW DELHI 14TH AUGUST, 2018