Case Note & Summary
The case concerns the murder of A.C. Yathisha on 03.04.2013. The prosecution alleged that the accused, Rajegowda @ Guruswamy, assaulted the deceased with a club and chopper due to suspicion of an illicit relationship with the accused's wife. The deceased, before dying, made oral declarations to his father (P.W.1) and other witnesses, stating that the accused had attacked him. P.W.1 lodged a complaint, leading to registration of a case. After investigation, the accused was charged with murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The trial court, the Principal Sessions Judge, Hassan, in S.C. No.190/2013, convicted the accused and sentenced him to life imprisonment but did not impose any fine. The accused filed Criminal Appeal No.409/2015 challenging the conviction and sentence, while the State filed Criminal Appeal No.896/2015 solely on the ground of non-imposition of fine, contending it is mandatory under Section 302 IPC. In the High Court, the accused argued that the oral dying declaration was unreliable as there was no corroboration, the mobile phones of the deceased and P.W.1 were not seized, crucial witnesses were not examined, and the investigation was deficient. He also contended that the dying declaration could not have been made given the nature of injuries, and the recovery of weapons was not from his exclusive possession. The State defended the conviction, arguing that the oral dying declaration was made to multiple witnesses and was consistent, the medical evidence supported homicidal death, and the chain of circumstances pointed to the accused's guilt. The State also submitted that fine is mandatory under Section 302 IPC. The High Court heard both sides and reserved judgment. On 23.09.2020, the Division Bench delivered its judgment, but the text provided does not include the final decision or ratio.
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court was justified in convicting the accused under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code based on oral dying declaration and circumstantial evidence; Whether the State's appeal for non-imposition of fine under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code is maintainable and should fine be imposed.
Law Points
- oral dying declaration
- circumstantial evidence
- burden of proof
- corroboration
- non-seizure of evidence
- mandatory fine under Section 302 IPC
Case Details
2020 LawText (KAR) (09) 99
CRL.A No.409/2015 c/w CRL.A No.896/2015
B. Veerappa, E.S. Indiresh
Sri Y.S. Shivaprasad (for accused), Sri Vijayakumar Majage (Additional State Public Prosecutor)
Sri Rajegowda @ Guruswamy (Accused), State of Karnataka (for non-imposition of fine)
State of Karnataka, Sri Rajegowda @ Guruswamy
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal appeal against conviction for murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
Remedy Sought
In Crl.A 409/2015, accused seeks setting aside of conviction and sentence; in Crl.A 896/2015, State seeks imposition of fine under Section 302 IPC.
Filing Reason
Accused aggrieved by conviction; State aggrieved by non-imposition of fine which is mandatory.
Previous Decisions
Trial court convicted accused under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment without fine.
Issues
Whether the conviction based on oral dying declaration and circumstantial evidence is sustainable?
Whether the non-imposition of fine contravenes Section 302 IPC, requiring enhancement of sentence?
Submissions/Arguments
Accused: Oral dying declaration unreliable; no seizure of mobile phones; non-examination of wife; hostile witness; no corroborating evidence; investigation lapses; injuries suggest inability to speak.
State: Oral dying declaration credible; multiple witnesses corroborated; homicidal death proven; medical evidence consistent; mandatory fine under Section 302 not imposed, requiring enhancement.
Judgment Excerpts
the accused had assaulted him with club stating that he is having illicit relationship with wife of the accused and dragged him to the garden and assaulted him with the chopper.
the death of Yathisha is homicidal and prosecution proved beyond all reasonable doubt that on 03.04.2013 at 6.00 pm on the road near the house of the accused and coffee estate of Murthy of Doddanahalli, Yeslur Hobli, Sakaleshapura Taluk, Hassan District, with an intention of committing the murder, the accused inflicted fatal injuries to Yathisha by assaulting him with deadly weapon-club and consequently, Yathisha succumbed to the injuries on the way to the Government Hospital and thereby, the accused committed an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
Procedural History
On 03.04.2013, the deceased A.C. Yathisha was assaulted and subsequently died. P.W.1, his father, lodged a complaint, leading to registration of a case. The investigation was conducted by Yeslur Police, resulting in a charge sheet being filed before the Civil Judge and JMFC, Sakaleshapura. The case was committed to the Sessions Court, Hassan, where Sessions Case No.190/2013 was registered. The trial court, after examining 22 prosecution witnesses and considering documentary and material evidence, convicted the accused under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment without fine on 04.03.2015. The accused filed Criminal Appeal No.409/2015 challenging the conviction, and the State filed Criminal Appeal No.896/2015 seeking imposition of fine. The High Court heard arguments and reserved judgment, which was pronounced on 23.09.2020.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code: 302
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 209, 313, 374(2), 377
