SIDDALINGAIAH vs STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:61324-DB
CRL.A No. 1413 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010350062021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 4 DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.PRAMOD
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1413 OF 2021 (C)
BETWEEN:
SIDDALINGAIAH
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
S/O NARASEEYAPPA
R/O AMARAVATHI VILLAGE
KASABA HOBLI
MADHUGIRI TALUK
TUMAKURU - 572 132
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. NAGARAJA REDDY D.,ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed
by
SHARADAVANI
B
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY MADHUGIRI POLICE
REP BY SPL. PP
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BANGALORE 560 001
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. VIJAYKUMAR MAJAGE,SPP-II A/W;
SRI. SUDHINDRA.B.S, HCGP)
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S.374(2) CR.P.C PLEASED TO SET
ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND ORDER OF
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:61324-DB
CRL.A No. 1413 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010350062021
SENTENCE DATED 14.09.2016, PASSED BY THE IV
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT MADHUGIRI
IN S.C.NO.5005/2016, CONVICTING THE APPELLANT
/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 302 OF IPC AND ETC.,
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.PRAMOD
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ)
The appellant/accused has preferred this appeal,
feeling aggrieved by the judgment and order of conviction
and sentence passed against him by the Court of the IV
Additional District and Sessions Judge at Madhugiri, in
S.C.No.5005/2016, wherein, he has been convicted for the
offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and
sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine
of Rs.5,000/- and in default to pay the fine, to undergo
simple imprisonment for two years.
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:61324-DB
CRL.A No. 1413 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010350062021
2. We have heard the learned counsel
Sri.Nagaraja Reddy D, for the appellant and learned SPP-
II, Sri. Vijaykumar Majage along with Sri. Sudhindra B.S.,
learned HCGP for the respondent-State. Perused the
evidence and material on record.
3. Brief facts:
The case of the prosecution is that on 23.04.2015 at
12.45 p.m., the deceased Gangadharaiah and
Narasiyappa, father of the accused were sitting and talking
in front of the house of the deceased situated in
Amaravathi Kasaba Hobli, Madhugiri Taluk, Tumakuru. The
accused entertaining a suspinion that the deceased was
instigating his father to deny him any share in the
properties, brought an iron machete from his house with
an intention to kill Gangadharaiah and assaulted him on
the left side of his neck and on his left cheek and
committed his murder.
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:61324-DB
CRL.A No. 1413 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010350062021
4. The accused was charged for the offence
punishable under Section 302 of IPC, for which he pleaded
not guilty and claimed to be tried. In order to establish
the charge, prosecution got examined 19 witnesses and
got marked 23 documents and 11 material objects.
5. The defence of the accused was one of denial.
In the cross-examination of the witnesses, a suggestion
was made to them by the defence that the deceased
ಈ ಮ
( )
accidentally fell down on eelige/Turige mane in
his house and succumbed to the injuries sustained by him.
It was also suggested to them that the accused was
suffering from mental illness. In the statement of the
accused recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., he denied
all the incriminating evidence appearing against him.
However, he did not lead any defence evidence.
6. The trial Court vide the judgment and order
dated 14.09.2016, convicted the accused for the offence
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:61324-DB
CRL.A No. 1413 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010350062021
charged against him, having found sufficient material
against him in the form of oral and documentary evidence.
7. PW.1 is the first informant and he is the son of
the deceased and an eyewitness to the incident. The
complaint is marked as Ex.P1. PWs.2 to 4 are the panch
witnesses to the inquest mahazar - Ex.P2. PW.5 is the
wife of the deceased. She is also an eyewitness to the
incident. PW.6 is another son of the deceased. He is a
hearsay witness. PWs.7 and 8 are also hearsay witnesses.
They have not supported the case of the prosecution.
PW.9 is a neighbour of the deceased. She is an
eyewitness to the incident. PW.10 is the panch witness to
Ex.P5 under which the clothes of the deceased (MOs. 2 to
4) were seized. PW.7 is the panch witness to Ex.P6,
mahazar in respect of seizure of MO.1-machete and Mos. 5
to 7 - clothes of the accused. PW.12 is a panch witness to
Ex.P7, seizure of clothes of the father the accused. PW.13
is the doctor who conducted the post mortem
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:61324-DB
CRL.A No. 1413 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010350062021
examination. The post mortem report is marked as Ex.P8.
The opinion furnished by him regarding the weapon-MO.1
is marked as Ex.P9. PW.14 is the Assistant Executive
Engineer who prepared the sketch of scene of occurrence,
marked as Ex.P10. PW.15 is the Head Constable, who
assisted in the investigation. PW.16 is the PDO who issued
Ex.P13, the document pertaining to house of the
deceased. PW.17 is the investigating officer who filed
charge sheet and PW.18 is the PSI who registered the case
and also apprehended the accused.
8. It is the case of the prosecution that on
23.04.2015 at about 12:45 p.m., deceased Gangadhariah
and Narasiyappa father of the accused were talking in
front of the house of the deceased. The accused, under
the impression that the deceased was instigating his father
not to give him share in the property assaulted
Gangadhariah with a machete on his neck and on the left
cheek and committed the murder.
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:61324-DB
CRL.A No. 1413 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010350062021
9. As per the Post Mortem Report- Ex.P8, death
was due to shock and heamorrhage as a result of injuries
sustained. The following external injuries were noticed on
the dead body:
1) Lacerated wound extending 3 cms below the
left lower lip upto the left pinna of the ear
measuring 11 cms in length, 1 cm width and
depth of 1.5 cms edges contused with upper
margins sloping lower margins inverted,
tailing of wound on towards left laterally.
2) A deep lacerated wound 2.5 cms below the
injury 1 extending from the left mastoid
process upto the midway between lower lip
and chin, measuring 15 cms in length, width
of 3.5 cms, depth of 1.5 cms edges contused
with sloping lower margin and inverted upper
margin. There is cut through parotid gland,
masseter muscle with fracture of the left
mandible involving the alveolar process with
loosening of 4 tooth namely 1 premolar, 2
canine, 1 incisor on the left lower jaw.
3) Lacerated wound over the upper aspect of the
nd
neck, 2 cms below the 2 injury measuring
10 cms in length, 3 cms width, depth 0.5 cm
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:61324-DB
CRL.A No. 1413 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010350062021
exposing the subcutaneous tissues edges
contused with sloping lower margin, upper
margin inverted.
4) Deep lacerated wound present 2 cms below
the injury (3), present over the middle of the
neck on left lateral aspect measuring 11 cms
in length, width 3 cms, depth of 2.5 cms with
contused edges. Theres is cut through skin,
platysma, sternocleidomastoid with severed
carotid artery and jugular vein upper margin
in sloping with lower margin inverted.
10. PW13 has deposed that he conducted the
postmortem examination of Gangadharaiah on 23.04.2015
and found the above mentioned injuries and issued the
postmortem report marked as Ex.P8. The injuries were
noticed at the time of conducting inquest panchanama-
Ex.P2. From the said evidence on record, prosecution has
established that Gangadharaiah died a homicidal death.
11. The case of the prosecution is mainly based on
the evidence of PW1, PW5 and PW9, the eyewitnesses.
PW1 is the son of the deceased. He lodged the complaint-
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:61324-DB
CRL.A No. 1413 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010350062021
Ex.P1 stating that on 23.04.2015 at about 12:30 p.m., he
returned to his house from the land and at that time his
father Gangadharaiah and Narasiyappa were talking near
the electric pole, in front of their house. Thereafter, he
went inside to have meal. At about 12:45 p.m., he heard
the screaming of his father and immediately he came out
and saw, the accused, son of Narasiyappa assaulting his
father on his neck with a machete. On seeing him, he
threw the machete and ran away from the spot. He has
stated that one Siddappa also witnessed the incident. The
complaint was lodged by 02:00 p.m., on the same day.
12. PW18-PSI has deposed about receiving the
complaint from PW1 and registering the case. Hence, the
complaint was lodged without any loss of time, naming the
accused as the one who assaulted the complainant's father
Gangadharaiah, with a machete.
13. PW5, wife of the deceased has also deposed
that, the accused assaulted her husband with a machete.
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:61324-DB
CRL.A No. 1413 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010350062021
Admittedly, the incident took place in front of the house of
the deceased and therefore, PW5 is a natural witness and
her presence near the scene of incident is believable.
14. PW9 is another eyewitness to the incident. She
has deposed that the house of the deceased was situated
behind her house. On the date of incident at about 12:30
p.m., she had gone to the terrace to dry the clothes. At
that time, she heard the screaming from the house of
Gangadharaiah and saw that the accused had assaulted
Gangadharaiah on his neck. She has identified MO1-
Machete.
15. The defence made a suggestion to the above
witnesses that the accused was mentally ill. However, they
have denied the said suggestion. The accused has not led
any defence evidence or established his defence either to
show that he was mentally ill or that his father accidentally
sustained injuries, when he fell on the eelige/Turige mane
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:61324-DB
CRL.A No. 1413 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010350062021
ಈ ಮ )
( . Both the suggestions were out rightly denied
by witnesses.
16. After the arrest of the accused, at his instance,
his blood-stained clothes, MOs.5 to 7 were seized. They
were sent to FSL for examination. As per the FSL report-
Ex.P22, the said clothes, the machete which was seized
from the spot were stained with blood. The blood stains
found on the clothes of the deceased and the weapon as
well as the clothes of the accused were all stained with
human ‘B’ group blood.
17. The learned counsel for the appellant has
contended that PW1 and PW5 have falsely implicated the
accused. He contended that as per the case of the
prosecution, the incident took place outside the house,
whereas, PW1 has deposed that on hearing the cries of his
father, he went inside the house. He further contended
that PW9 witnessing the incident is doubtful, in view her
evidence that she climbed a tree to get a glimpse of the
- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:61324-DB
CRL.A No. 1413 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010350062021
incident. Such minor discrepancies will not affect the
account of the eye-witnesses.
18. The complaint was lodged without any delay,
narrating the incident and the manner in which the
accused assaulted the deceased. The evidence of PW1 is
corroborated by medical evidence and is further
corroborated by the evidence of PW5 and PW9. No
animosity has been elicited in the cross-examination of
these witnesses to falsely implicate the accused. The
recovery of blood stained clothes of the accused and the
FSL report further strengthen the prosecution case in
establishing the charge levelled against the accused. On
perusal of the entire material on record, we are of the
considered view that the prosecution has established the
charge of murder levelled against the accused, beyond
reasonable doubt. The judgment and order of conviction
and sentence passed by the trial Court is therefore,
sustainable in law. Hence the following order:
- 13 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:61324-DB
CRL.A No. 1413 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010350062021
dismissed
Appeal is .
Sd/-
(MOHAMMAD NAWAZ)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(B.PRAMOD)
JUDGE
BSV,HB
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20