Case Note & Summary
The appeals arose from the judgment of the Fast Track (Sessions) Judge-V, Bengaluru City, in S.C. No. 1199/2012, convicting the accused under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), and sentencing them to life imprisonment with a direction that they be not released for the rest of their lives. The State filed Criminal Appeal No. 766/2014 seeking modification of the judgment to impose a fine, contending that imposition of fine is mandatory under the said provision. The incident occurred on 28 May 2012 at about 6:30 p.m. when deceased Divya, after completing her work, was walking in the 7th Main Road, BTM II Stage, Bengaluru. Accused No. 1 allegedly had a one-sided love interest towards the deceased and was angered by her disinterest and marriage discussions with PW-8. On the fateful day, accused Nos. 1 and 2 came on a Splendor motorbike; accused No. 1 got down and assaulted Divya with a long chopper on her neck, causing severe injuries. She was taken to Sagar Hospital where she succumbed. PW-1 V. Srirama witnessed the incident and lodged a report at Mico Layout Police Station, leading to registration of Crime No. 263/2012 initially under Section 307 IPC, later converted to Section 302 IPC after the death. Accused were arrested on 2 June 2012. The prosecution examined 13 witnesses and marked documents Exs. P-1 to P-25 and MOs 1 to 12. The defence examined four witnesses and marked Exs. D-1 to D-14. The main issues revolved around the credibility of the sole eye-witness PW-1, motive, and recovery of incriminating articles. The defence argued that the identification was flawed due to the absence of a test identification parade and the police showing the accused to PW-1 at the police station. They challenged PW-1's presence at the scene based on mobile tower location and Ex. D-6, and contended that he was a chance witness. The recovery of clothes and motorcycle was attacked based on inconsistencies in the evidence of PW-5. The motive factor was said to be an improvement as it was not mentioned in Ex. P-2. The prosecution countered that PW-1's presence was corroborated by defence evidence, he was an independent witness with no reason to falsely implicate, and the core of the prosecution case remained intact. The High Court heard the arguments and reserved judgment on 20 February 2019. The provided excerpt does not include the court's analysis or final decision.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Identification - Test Identification Parade - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 54A - Accused contended that absence of identification parade and prior showing of accused to eye-witness PW-1 at police station vitiates identification; prosecution argued PW-1's testimony is credible despite lack of TIP (Paras 10-12). B) Evidence - Witness - Sole Eye-Witness - Reliability - Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Section 3 - Accused argued PW-1's presence at scene doubtful based on mobile tower location and Ex.D-6; prosecution claimed his presence is established even by defense evidence and he is an independent witness with no motive to falsely implicate (Paras 11, 13). C) Criminal Law - Motive - Proof of Mens Rea - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302 - Accused contended motive was not mentioned in initial complaint Ex.P-2 and was an improvement; prosecution relied on prior threats and love affair (Paras 6, 12-13). D) Criminal Procedure - Recovery - Incriminating Articles - Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Section 27 - Accused challenged recovery of clothes and motorcycle based on inconsistencies in PW-5's testimony and procedural lapses; prosecution argued recovery was proved (Paras 11, 14). E) Sentencing - Fine - Mandatory Imposition - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 302 - State appealed for imposition of fine contending it is mandatory; trial court had not imposed fine (Paras 5, 14).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court's conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC is sustainable on the basis of the evidence of sole eye-witness, motive, and recovery, in light of the alleged inconsistencies and lack of identification parade.
