Karnataka High Court
Shivanna Nayaka vs State Of Karnataka on 5 November, 2024
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:44358
CRL.A No. 1277 of 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1277 OF 2012
BETWEEN:
SHIVANNA NAYAKA
S/O LATE ANGADI KALAYANAKA
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
R/AT KAPPASOGE VILLAGE
HULLAHALLI HOBLI
NANJANGUD TALUK.
...APPELLANT
Digitally signed by (BY SMT. BUDRUNNISA, ADVOCATE)
LAKSHMINARAYANA
MURTHY RAJASHRI
Location: HIGH AND:
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY HULLAHALLI
POLICE STATION
MYSORE.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI A VENKAT SATHYANARAYANA, HCGP)
THIS CRL.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 374(2) Cr.P.C
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND
ORDER OF SENTENCE DATED 23.04.2012 PASSED BY THE II
ADDITIONAL S.J., MYSORE IN S.C.No.60/2010 - CONVICTING
THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE
UNDER SECTION 498-a 306 OF IPC AND ETC.,
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:44358
CRL.A No. 1277 of 2012
ORAL JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the appellant -accused No.1
praying to set aside the judgment of conviction and order
on sentence dated 23.04.2012 passed in S.C.No.60/2010
by the II Additional Sessions Judge, Mysore, whereunder
the appellant -accused has been convicted for offences
punishable under Sections 306 and 498A of Indian Penal
Code (hereinafter referred to as "IPC" for brevity) and
sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period
of 05 years and pay fine of Rs.5,000/- for offence
punishable under Section 306 of IPC and sentenced to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 02 years
and pay fine of Rs.2,000/- for offence punishable under
Section 498A of IPC.
2. The factual matrix of the case is that the
appellant -accused No.1 married the deceased -
Gurushantamma nearly 14 years from the date of the
incident. After marriage, the deceased -Gurushantamma
started living with accused Nos.1 to 3. Accused No.3 is
NC: 2024:KHC:44358
mother in law and accused No.2 is brother in law of the
deceased -Gurushantamma. Couples were happy for
about one year and thereafter the appellant -accused No.1
used to come house after drinking liquor and use to
physically and mentally ill-treat the deceased -
Gurushantamma. He was also not arranging for
maintenance of the deceased -Gurushantamma by not
brining the grocery to the home. On 2 -3 occasions
panchayath was held to patch up the matter, but without
any success. The appellant -accused No.1 continued the
ill-treatment. That on 08.11.2009 at about 8.00p.m., there
was a galata in between the deceased and one Devamma
in respect of collecting tap water. At that time, the
appellant -accused No.1 -the husband of the deceased -
Gurushantamma raised objection for deceased abusing
Devamma and others, took her to his house and continued
the galata. During the early hours, the deceased -
Gurushantamma has left the house and she was not to be
heard or traced. The parents of the deceased -
NC: 2024:KHC:44358
Gurushantamma started searching her and they were
unable to trace her till 11.11.2009. On 11.11.2009 her
body was traced in Kabini Channel at Haggadahalli village.
3. The missing complaint came to be registered in
Crime No.167/2009 and investigation was taken up. On
tracing the dead body, another complaint was filed by
brother of the deceased. On the basis of which the case of
murder was registered. After investigation charge sheet
came to be filed against the appellant -accused No.1 and
two others i.e. accused No.2 and accused No.3 for
offences punishable under Sections 306 and 498A of IPC.
The case came to be committed to Court of Sessions, the
Session Court framed charges against the appellant -
accused No.1 and two others for offences punishable
under Sections 306 and 498A of IPC.
4. In order to prove charges, the prosecution has
examined 20 witnesses as P.W.1 to P.W.20, got marked
documents as EX.P1 to Ex.P48 and material objects as
M.O's.1 to 4. The statement of the accused came to be
NC: 2024:KHC:44358
recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. The trial Court after
hearing arguments formulated points for consideration and
passed the impugned judgment convicting the appellant -
accused No.1 for offences punishable under Sections 306
and 498A of IPC. The said judgment of conviction and
order on sentence has been challenged in this appeal.
5. Heard learned counsel for the appellant -
accused No.1 and learned High Court Government Pleader
for the respondent -State.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant -accused
No.1 would contend that the marriage of the deceased -
Gurushantamma with the appellant -accused No.2 was
love marriage and it has taken place 14 years prior to the
date of the incident. The said marriage has been
performed in Dharamstala as parents of the deceased -
Gurushantamma are not agreed for the said marriage. She
further contends that as marriage of the deceased -
Gurushantamma with appellant -accused No.1 was love
marriage, the family members of the deceased -
NC: 2024:KHC:44358
Gurushantamma cutoff their relationship with the
deceased. The deceased was not happy with the said
aspect of not invited by her parents and brothers to their
home for festivals and other occasions. She further
contends that P.W.8 -son of the deceased -
Gurushantamma has stated the said aspect in his evidence
that parents of the deceased have not invited the
deceased -Gurushantamma for festivals and she was
crying for the same. There are material contradictions in
the evidence of P.W.1, 5, 6, 14, 16 and 19. P.W.17 is
Taluk Panchayath President and only at his instance the
case came to be registered against the appellant -accused
No.2 and other accused. The date and time of panchayath
has not been stated by the prosecution witnesses in their
evidence. The deceased -Gurushantamma had not filed
any complaint during her life time regarding harassment
and ill -treatment given by this appellant -accused No.1.
P.W.6 -Devamma has turned hostile with regard to quarrel
between her and deceased -Gurushantamma with regard
NC: 2024:KHC:44358
to collecting tap water. The evidence on record is not
sufficient to convict the appellant -accused No.1 for
offences charged against him. In alternate learned
counsel for the appellant -accused No.1 submits that the
appellant -accused No.1 has already undergone sentence
of 01 year and prayed to reduce the sentence to the
period already undergone. With these, she prayed to
allow the appeal.
7. Per contra, learned High Court Government
Pleader for the respondent -State would contend that the
trial Court considering the evidence on record has rightly
convicted the appellant -accused No.1 for offences
charged against him. The evidence of P.W.1, 5, 14, 15,
16, 17 and 18 will establish that the appellant -accused
No.1 use to consume alcohol, harass and assault the
deceased -Gurushantamma and did not provided grocery
to prepare food and etc. He has supported reasons
assigned by the trial Court. With these, he prays for
dismissal of the appeal.
NC: 2024:KHC:44358
8. Having heard learned counsels, this Court has
perused the impugned judgment and trial Court records.
9. Considering the said aspect, the following
points arises for my consideration;
1. Whether the trial Court erred in
convicting the appellant -accused No.1 for
offence punishable under Section 498A of
IPC?
2. Whether the trial Court erred in
convicting the appellant -accused No.1 for
offence punishable under Section 306 of
IPC?
My answer to above points as under
Point No.1 in the Negative
Point No.2 in the affirmative.
10. The marriage of the deceased -
Gurushantamma with the appellant -accused No.1 was
love marriage and it had taken place 14 years prior to her
death. The said aspect has been admitted by P.W.14 -
mother of the deceased in her cross examination. P.W.18
NC: 2024:KHC:44358
is son of the appellant -accused No.1 and deceased -
Gurushantamma and he was aged about 14 years as on
the date of his evidence. P.W.18 has deposed that he did
not know the reason for death of his mother. He has
stated that parents of his mother have not invited her for
festivals and therefore, she was crying for the same. He
has stated there were no quarrels between his father and
mother.
11. P.W.1 is brother of the deceased -
Gurushantamma. He has deposed regarding the appellant
-accused No.1 consuming alcohol and assaulting his
younger sister - deceased -Gurushantamma and accused
No.1 not providing grocery for cooking food and in that
regard panchayaths were held. P.W.5 is another brother
of the deceased. He has deposed that accused persons
used to assault the deceased -Gurushantamma, quarrel
regarding collecting tap water between the deceased -
Gurushantamma and Devamma and in that regard
accused No.1 quarreled with the deceased. P.W.8 is the
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC:44358
said Devamma. She has deposed that the appellant -
accused No.1 used to consume alcohol and use to make
galata everyday and he used to make galata only when he
was under intoxication and not other days. She has stated
that she has heard quarrelling between the deceased -
Gurushantamma and her husband -appellant -accused
No.1. She further deposed that the appellant -accused
No.1 was not providing food and in that regard they were
quarrelling.
12. P.W.14 -the mother of the deceased has
deposed that the appellant -accused No.1 used to
consume alcohol and use to make galata with the
deceased -Gurushantamma and accused No.1 was not
providing food to the deceased. P.W.16 is Village Head
and he has deposed regarding advising the appellant -
accused No.1 and other accused in the panchayath as
they are harassing the deceased -Gurushantamma. He
has deposed that there were allegations against the
appellant -accused No.1 with regard to not providing food
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC:44358
to the deceased. P.W.17 is Taluk Panchayath President
and he has deposed that holding panchayath 2-3 times as
accused No.1 used to come drunk and used to quarrel
with his wife- deceased -Gurushantamma. P.W.19 has
also deposed holding panchayath by them as there were
quarrel between accused No.1 and his wife and advising
them. He has also deposed that the deceased has
complained that accused No.1 has not providing food and
etc.
13. Considering all these aspects, it is clear that
the appellant -accused No.1 used to come drunk and used
to harass the deceased -Gurushantamma. The said
evidence on record will establish that the appellant -
accused No.1 has committed offence punishable under
Section 498A of IPC.
14. The accusation against the appellant - accused
No.1 that he has abetted the deceased to commit suicide
by assaulting and harassing her. Marriage of the
appellant - accused No.1 with the deceased was a love
- 12 -
NC: 2024:KHC:44358
marriage which had taken place 14 years prior to the date
of the incident. The marriage of the appellant - accused
No.1 and the deceased had been performed in
Dharmasthala against the wish of her parents and it has
also been admitted by PW14 - mother of the deceased.
The deceased and the appellant - accused No.1 had a son
by name Prathap who was aged 12 years as on the date
of the incident. PW1 has also admitted in the cross
examination that marriage of the deceased and the
appellant - accused No.1 was a love marriage. The
prosecution witnesses have deposed regarding the
appellant - accused No.1 coming to the house consuming
alcohol and harassing and assaulting his wife ie., the
deceased Smt.Gurushanthamma. The said harassment
started after one year of her marriage and it has been
deposed by her mother - PW14. The deceased had two
children and out of that, one child died and another male
child survived, whose name is Prathap. Said Prathap has
been examined as PW18. PW18 has stated that he do not
- 13 -
NC: 2024:KHC:44358
know the reason for death of his mother. He has stated
that his mother was crying as her parents did not invite
her for the festival. Considering the said aspect, whether
the deceased committed suicide as the appellant -
accused No.1 has harassed her and as her parents did not
invite her for the festival etc., It appears that the
deceased was adjusted to the said harassment as she led
marital life with her husband for 14 years even though the
said harassment started after one year of marriage.
Therefore, a doubt arises as to whether the deceased has
committed suicide as she was not invited by her parents
for the festival or as her husband used to harass her.
Therefore, the evidence on record is not sufficient to hold
that the appellant - accused No.1 by his acts abetted the
deceased to commit suicide. Therefore, the prosecution
has failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the
appellant - accused No.1 abetted the deceased to commit
suicide and has committed the offence punishable under
Section 306 of IPC. Therefore, the benefit of doubt has to
- 14 -
NC: 2024:KHC:44358
be extended to the appellant - accused No.1. Therefore,
the learned Sessions Judge has erred in convicting the
appellant - accused No.1 for the offence under Section
306 of IPC.
15. The appellant - accused No.1 has been
sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period
of three years and to pay fine of Rs.3,000/- for the offence
under Section 498A of IPC. Considering the fact that the
appellant - accused No.1 is having a son by name Prathap
ie., PW18 and the incident has taken place about 14 years
ago, the sentence imposed on him for the offence under
Section 498A of IPC requires to be reduced to the
sentence already undergone by him by enhancing fine
amount. The appellant - accused No.1 has already
undergone sentence for a period of 12 months i.e., one
year. Therefore, the appellant - accused No.1 has been
sentenced to a period already undergone by him. In view
of the above, the following;
- 15 -
NC: 2024:KHC:44358
ORDER
The appeal is allowed in part. The judgment of
conviction and order on sentence dated 23.04.2024
passed in S.C.No.60/2010 by the II Additional Sessions
Judge, Mysuru is modified as under;
(i) The appellant - accused No.1 is acquitted
of the offence punishable under Section
306 of IPC.
(ii) The conviction of the appellant - accused
No.1 for the offence under Section 498A
of IPC is affirmed. The appellant -
accused No.1 is sentenced to
imprisonment already undergone by him
and to pay fine of Rs.7,000/- and in
default to undergo Simple Imprisonment
for a period of one month.
In view of disposal of this appeal, the pending
applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
Sd/-
(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR)
JUDGE
DSP,GH
