Case Note & Summary
The High Court of Karnataka, Kalaburagi Bench, allowed a criminal appeal filed by the accused-husband challenging his conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, for the murder of his wife. The prosecution alleged that on 20-04-2015, at about 11:30 p.m. in Tenihalli Village, the accused, suspecting his wife Meenaxi of an illicit relationship with another man, quarreled with her and assaulted her with a sugar cane cutting chopper, causing multiple fatal injuries. The trial court convicted the accused after examining twenty-two witnesses. In appeal, the High Court found that all material witnesses turned hostile and provided no support to the prosecution case. PW-1, the father of the deceased and the complainant, denied knowledge of the contents of the complaint and stated that the police had written it. The alleged eye witnesses, including the accused's mother (PW-9) and son (PW-10), and neighbours (PW-13, PW-14, PW-21), uniformly stated they knew nothing about the incident. Other family members examined as witnesses also pleaded ignorance and denied giving statements to the police. The inquest panch witnesses (PW-2 and PW-11) denied that any panchanama was drawn in their presence. None of the witnesses even testified about the death of the deceased, let alone linking the accused to the crime. The High Court observed that despite the prosecution declaring these witnesses hostile and cross-examining them, no incriminating material was elicited. The complaint was not proven, and there was no credible evidence to establish either the death of the deceased or the role of the accused. Consequently, the prosecution failed to discharge its burden of proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The Court set aside the conviction and order on sentence, acquitted the accused, and directed that he be set at liberty.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302 - The prosecution case rested on the testimony of the complainant, eye witnesses, family members, and panch witnesses, all of whom turned hostile and denied knowledge of the incident. The complaint (Ex.P-1) was not proved as the complainant disowned its contents. Held that in the absence of any credible evidence, the prosecution failed to establish the death of the deceased and the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, and the conviction is unsustainable. (Paras 10-19)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed murder of his wife under Section 302 IPC. Whether the trial court's conviction and sentence warrants interference.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence, and acquitted the appellant of the charge under Section 302 IPC. The Court held that the prosecution failed to prove the death of the deceased and the involvement of the accused due to all material witnesses turning hostile and lack of admissible evidence.
Law Points
- hostile witnesses
- burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt
- evidentiary value of hostile witnesses
- murder case proof
- inquest panchanama
- complaint not proved
- eye witness turning hostile
- acquittal in criminal appeal
