ESHWARAPPA vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Full Judgment Text

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1951 OF 2012<br>Eshwarappa …Appellant<br>Versus<br>State of Karnataka …Respondent<br>J U D G M E N T<br>T.S. THAKUR, J.
1.		This appeal arises out of a judgment and order dated 10	th

August, 2011 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore, JUDGMENT whereby the High Court has dismissed Criminal Appeal No.1676 of 2007 filed by the appellant thereby affirming his conviction for offences punishable under Sections 302, 498A and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the varying sentences of imprisonment and fine awarded to him for the same. 1 Page 1

2.		The deceased-Latha and the appellant herein got married to

each other on 20	th	March, 2003. The prosecution version is that the

deceased-Latha and her husband the appellant herein lived happily

for a few months after their marriage in March 2003 during which

time Latha conceived and gave birth to a female child. The marital

relationship, however, soured when the appellant developed illicit

relations with one Sarpina @ Sarfunnisa arrayed as accused no.2

before the Trial Court. The deceased-Latha, but naturally took
exception to this relationship and	informed her parents about the

same who had a panchayat conven	ed in the village to resolve the

matter. The panchayat, according to the prosecution, advised the

appellant to end his relationship with Sarpina, his paramour, which

JUDGMENT the appellant agreed to do. That commitment was however observed but only in breach as the illicit relationship between the appellant and Sarpina continued resulting in frequent quarrels between the appellant and the deceased-Latha. The prosecution case is that although the parents of the deceased had given dowry articles to the deceased including a sum of rupees one lakh 2 Page 2 towards cash, the appellant was demanding more money for purchase of a site. In order to satisfy that demand, the parents of the deceased had mortgaged their land and paid a sum of

Rs.50,000/- to the appellant. It is also alleged that the appellant

was neglecting the deceased and was residing with Sarpina,

accused no.2. The deceased was provoked by this conduct and is

alleged to have gone to the house of Sarpina (A-2) to lodge her

protest in an attempt to wean the appellant away from the illicit

relationship. This provoked the appellant, who assaulted the
deceased. The parents of the dec	eased had in that background

taken the deceased away to her	parental home with her minor

child. The prosecution case is that a day prior to the incident the

parents of the deceased brought the deceased-Latha back to her JUDGMENT matrimonial home in village Lakya, but the appellant’s cruel behaviour towards her continued unabated. On the fateful day, the deceased appears to have asked the appellant to pay her some money so that she could take her sick child to the doctor. The appellant is alleged to have asked her to come to the field, where the appellant was going for work to collect the money. According to 3 Page 3 the prosecution, Latha followed her husband to the field while her parents returned to their village, but only to receive by evening the sad news that their daughter was lying dead under a tamarind tree

near the land of the appellant in his village. They rushed to the

village and the place of occurrence only to find that the deceased

had died of strangulation. The matter was, thereupon, reported to

the police who registered a case, commenced and completed the

investigation and filed a charge-sheet not only against the

appellant whom the prosecution accused of committing offences
punishable under Sections 498A, 30	2 and 201 IPC but even against

the parents of the appellant and S	arpina, the alleged lady love of
the appellant.

3.		JUDGMENT<br>At the trial, the prosecution examined as many as 20

witnesses to prove the charges against the accused persons. The Trial Court, however, came to the conclusion that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused persons except the appellant who was found guilty for offences punishable under Sections 498A, 302 and 201 IPC. He was accordingly sentenced to 4 Page 4 undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.25,000/- under Section 302 IPC. The fine amount was directed to be paid to the grandparents of the child left behind by the deceased. He was

also sentenced to undergo imprisonment for three years and to pay

a fine of Rs.2,000/- under Section 498A IPC. In default, three

months imprisonment was prescribed. For the offence punishable

under Section 201 IPC, the appellant was sentenced to undergo

imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-. In

default of payment of fine, he was sentenced to undergo
imprisonment for three months. All	the sentences were directed to
run concurrently.

4.		Aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the Trial

JUDGMENT Court, the appellant preferred Criminal Appeal No.1676 of 2007 which was heard and dismissed by the High Court in terms of its order impugned in this appeal. The High Court, on a careful reappraisal of the evidence on record, came to the conclusion that the appellant had been rightly found guilty by the Trial Court. The High Court found the following circumstances to have been fully 5 Page 5 established by the evidence on record:

(1)		That the appellant had developed illicit intimacy with

Sarpina (A-2) because of which there was no cordiality

between the appellant, on the one hand, and his wife,<br>the deceased on the other.	between the appellant, on the one hand, and his wife,
(2)	On the date of the incident at about 7.00 a.m. when the
deceased requested the appellant to give some money to<br>her so that she could take her child to the hospital, the<br>appellant asked the deceased to come to the field where<br>he would give her the money she required.
		ney she required.
(3) The deceased followed th		e instructions given to her and
went to the field where the appellant was working. She
	went to the field where the appellant was working. She

he would give her the mo	ney she required.

was thus last seen alone in the company of the JUDGMENT appellant.

(4)		The death of the deceased was homicidal in nature

caused due to asphyxia. The ligature marks found around the neck of the deceased proved that there was constriction of the neck of the deceased because of exertion of force. 6 Page 6

(5)		The appellant had piled a heap of stones and tied a rope

to the branch of the tamarind tree, only to support a false plea in defence that the deceased had committed

suicide.<br>(6) The conduct of the appellant was unnatural and<br>incompatible with his innocence. He did not inform the<br>police or the parents of the deceased and disappeared<br>from the scene of occurrence, after the commission of<br>the offence.
5.	The High Court, at the same ti	me, held that the depositions of

the parents of the deceased regar		ding demand and acceptance of

dowry before or after marriage were neither consistent nor credible

(6)		The conduct of the appellant was unnatural and

to provide a basis for convicting the appellant under Section 498A JUDGMENT IPC. The High Court held that the financial condition of the parents of the deceased was precarious as they were living in a Janatha house and working as labourers in a saw-mill in village Gavanahalli. Having said that the High Court dismissed the appeal in toto although on the finding recorded by it the High Court could 7 Page 7 and indeed should have set aside the conviction of the appellant under Section 498A IPC.

6.		We have heard learned couns	el for the parties at some length

who have taken us through the evidence on record and the

judgments delivered by this Court. The Trial Court and so also the

High Court have both concurrently held the material facts to have

been fully established. For instance the Trial Court as also the High
Court have found the version given by Chandramma (PW-1), who

happens to be the mother of th			e deceased-Latha, to be fully

reliable. This witness had depose			d that the deceased used to

frequently visit her parental house and tell her parents about the

illicit intimacy between the appellant and Sarpina (A-2). She would JUDGMENT also complain to her parents that the appellant was living with Sarpina (A-2). Chandramma (PW-1) advised the appellant to end his illicit relationship with Sarpina (A-2) but the appellant paid no heed to that advice even after a panchayat was convened to resolve the matter. The panchayat was attended by PW-6 and PWs 12 to 14. The appellant had, before the panchas agreed to 8 Page 8 discontinue his illegal liaison and lead a happy married life with the deceased. It was on that assurance given to the panchas, that the latter had advised the parents of the deceased not to lodge any

complaint against the appellant. Despite the panchayat and the

advice given to the appellant, however, the deceased had returned

to her parents’ house just about 15 days after the pancyahat,

whereupon Chandramma (PW-1) had gone to Lakya village and

questioned the appellant whether he would end his illicit

relationship with Sarpina (A-2). He had in reply said that he would
rather give up his wife deceased	-Latha than to discontinue his
relationship with Sarpina (A-2).

7.		PW-6 and PWs 12 to 14 have similarly deposed about the

JUDGMENT panchayat held in the village and the advice given to the appellant regarding discontinuation of his illicit relationship with Sarpina (A-2). These witnesses have deposed that the appellant had before the panchayat promised that he would end his relationship with Sarpina (A-2) and lead a happy married life with the deceased-Latha wherein he had failed to abide by. Both the Trial 9 Page 9 Court and the High Court have found the depositions of these witnesses to be free from any blemish. It was found that these witnesses do not bear any enmity or grudge against the appellant

to make them unreliable. These witnesses had also advised the

appellant to maintain cordial relationship with the deceased and to

discontinue his illicit relationship with Sarpina (A-2) who was ten
years older to him.<br>8. The deposition of Chandramma (PW-1) in regard to the

events that took place on the date	of incident has also been found

to be reliable. This witness has dep	osed that when she came to the

house of the appellant to see her daughter, she found that Latha

had taken her child to the hospital and returned home in the

evening on 6	th	JUDGMENT<br>November, 2005. The appellant had, however,

stayed in the house of Sarpina (A-2) that night. The next day, the deceased had demanded money from the appellant so that she could take the child back to the hospital. The accused asked the deceased to come to the field where he would pay the money to her. The witness and her husband left for the bus stand to return 10 Page 10 home while the deceased had along with her child gone to the field where the appellant had called her to collect the money. She was sometime later found dead under a tree which information was conveyed to the parents the same day.

9.		L.G. Shivaswamy (PW-4) is another witness who deposed

that he saw the deceased going in front of his shop towards the

land of her husband along with her child. About 15 minutes later

the appellant came to the shop of this witness who asked him to
return the money which he had			borrowed. The witness also

deposed about the panchayat h			eld two months prior to the

occurrence regarding the ill-treatment meted out to the deceased

by the appellant. In the course of the panchayat, the panchs had JUDGMENT advised the appellant not to assault his wife. In response, the appellant had assured the panchas that he would maintain cordiality with his wife. According to the witness, there was no intimacy between the appellant and Sarpina (A-2). The witness was at this stage declared hostile, cross-examined and confronted with his statement under Section 161 Cr.PC. in which he had 11 Page 11 mentioned about the illicit relationship between the appellant and Sarpina (A-2) and the assurance given to the panchas that he would end the said relationship.


10.		Mari Shetty (PW-5) is the father of the deceased-Latha who

has also deposed on the same lines as Chandramma (PW-1)

regarding the treatment given to the deceased by the appellant
and the illegal demand for dowry made upon them.
11.	Reference may also be made		to the deposition of L.L. Nagesh

(PW-6) who has deposed that			the relationship between the

appellant and the deceased was not cordial because of the illicit

liaison between the appellant and Sarpina (A-2) since 2-3 years. JUDGMENT He also stated that because of the illicit relationship, the appellant was always living in the house of Sarpina (A-2). A panchayat had even taken place, according to this witness, in which the appellant had given an assurance that he would end his illicit relationship. On the date of the incident, the witness claims to have seen the deceased and her parents near the shop of one master at about 12 Page 12 10.30 a.m.

12.		Rangaswamy (PW-11) is the real brother of (PW-1) and

brother-in-law of (PW-5). He too	has supported the prosecution

case in regard to the illicit intimacy between the appellant and

Sarpina (A-2). He has also supported the prosecution version for

demand for dowry. Chandrashekhar (PW-12) is also the maternal

uncle of the deceased has supported the prosecution case and had
visited the matrimonial house of the deceased to resolve the

dispute between the couple. K.B.	Shekharappa (PW-14) is one of

the panchas who too has suppo	rted the prosecution case and

clearly deposed that he attended the panchayat in which the

appellant’s illicit affair with Sarpina (A-2) was discussed. The JUDGMENT panchas had advised the appellant to end his illegal relationship.

13.		The only other witness whose deposition is relevant is Dr.

Nagesh S. Adiga (PW-15) who conducted the post-mortem examination of the deceased and found ligature marks around her neck. The witness in his deposition has said: 13 Page 13

	“On further examination of the body, I did not

notice any external injuries except for the ligature mark around the neck.

The ligature mark was oblique and was extending<br>across the front of the neck from the angle of left jaw<br>and measured 1.5 cms in width and 16 cms in length<br>and it was situated just 2.5 cms below the right mastoid<br>with knot mark measuring 2.5 cms over the left<br>mastoid.”
14. The witness has described the	cause of death nearly 10 days

after the post-mortem examination in reply to a communication
received from the Circle Police Inspector in the following words:
received from the Circle Police Inspector in the following words:

	The ligature mark was oblique and was extending

“	(i)		JUDGMENT<br>The cause of death is due to constriction force

obliquely around neck leading to asphyxia and shock is most probably due to hanging.

(ii)		The cause of death is ante mortem in nature and

death has occurred in less than 24 hours.

(iii)		The ligature mark is ante-mortem in nature.”

14 Page 14

15.		In the light of the evidence on record, it was argued on behalf

of the appellant that there was no eye witness to the occurrence and the entire prosecution case was based on circumstantial

evidence. It was also submitted that the circumstances sought to

be relied upon do not form a complete chain so as to lead the

Court to an irresistible conclusion that the death of the deceased

was homicidal and the appellant was responsible for the same. In

particular, reliance was placed by learned counsel for the appellant

upon the deposition of the doctor to suggest that the death could
have been caused by hanging.
16.		The Trial Court and so also the High Court has rejected the

story of suicide by the deceased and in our opinion rightly so, for

J<br>reasons more than one.	UDG<br>Firstly, be	MENT<br>cause the death in the case at

hand occurred because of strangulation/constriction force around the neck leading to asphyxia and shock as observed by the doctor which is possible not necessarily by hanging, although the doctor

has opined it could be caused probably by hanging also.	Secondly	,

because if death had occurred because of hanging, she would have 15 Page 15 been discovered by the witnesses in a hanging position, unless of course somebody had upon seeing her hanging, brought her down and placed the body on the ground or the rope by which she hung

herself had itself snapped in which event there would have been a

rope partly tied to the branch of the tamarind tree and partly

around her neck with a noose which the witnesses say was not

there.	Thirdly	, because it is nobody’s case that she was carrying a

rope with herself when she was seen going towards the field. The

presence of the rope and the heap of stones before the branch was
obviously a make-believe situation			created by the appellant, who

was seen by the witness, retur			ning from the field. Fourthly,

because there was no immediate provocation for the deceased to

take the step to commit suicide. All that she wanted was money JUDGMENT from her husband to take her child to the hospital for treatment. Besides, the parents of the deceased were also present in the village around the time the deceased went towards the field which only shows that there was no intense or great provocation that could have led her to commit suicide. Fifthly, because the classic

signs of death by hanging as reported in	Modi’s Medical

16 Page 16

Jurisprudence and Toxicology	(23rd	Edition)	like face being

usually pale; saliva dribbling out of the mouth down on the chin and chest; Neck Stretched and elongated in fresh bodies; Ligature

mark being oblique, non-continuous and placed high up in the neck

between the chin and the larynx, the base of the groove or furrow

being hard yellow and parchment like; Abrasions and ecchymoses

around the edges of the ligature mark, subcutaneous tissues under

the mark being white or glistening; carotid arteries, internal coats

being ruptured; fracture or dislocation of the cervical vertebrae
were all conspicuously absent in t	he case at hand as is evident

from the post-mortem report prepa

17.		In the totality of the circumstances and having regard to the

JUDGMENT nature of the evidence which the courts below have found credible on all material aspects of the prosecution case, we do not see any compelling reason to interfere with the view taken by the Trial Court as affirmed by the High Court. The only modification no matter inconsequential in the facts and circumstances of the case that we may make is the setting aside of the conviction of the 17 Page 17 appellant for the offence punishable under Section 498A Indian Penal Code.

18.		We, accordingly, allow this ap	peal but only in part and to the

limited extent that the judgment and order passed by the Trial

Court as affirmed by the High Court in so far as the same convicts

and sentences the appellant to imprisonment for the offence

punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code shall
stand set aside. The appeal insofar as the same challenges the

conviction and sentence of impriso			nment awarded to the appellant

for the offence under Section 3			02 IPC as also the sentence

awarded under Section 201 IPC together with the amount of fine

imposed and the sentence in default shall stand dismissed.

		JUDG

………………………………….…..…J. (T.S. THAKUR) ………………………………….…..…J. New Delhi (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) July 24, 2015 18 Page 18 ITEM NO.1D-For Judgment COURT NO.2 SECTION IIB S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Criminal Appeal No(s). 1951/2012

STATE OF KARNATAKA Respondent(s) Date : 24/07/2015 This appeal was called on for pronouncement of JUDGMENT today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Ranbir Singh Yadav,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. V. N. Raghupathy,Adv. Hon'ble Mr. Justice T.S. Thakur pronounced the judgment of the Bench comprising His Lordship and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel. The appeal is partly allowed in terms of the Signed JUDGMENT Reportable Judgment. (VINOD KR.JHA) (VEENA KHERA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER (Signed Reportable judgment is placed on the file) 19 Page 19