SATISHA vs STATE OF KARNATAKA

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59954-DB
CRL.A No. 15 of 2021

CNR: KAHC010127422020





IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

TH
DATED THIS THE 28 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026


PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.PRAMOD

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 15 OF 2021 (C)


BETWEEN:




SATISHA
S/O GOVINDAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
LABOURER
R/O MALENAHALLI VILLAGE
BHADRAVATHI - 577 301
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. PRASAD B S.,ADVOCATE)






AND:


STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY RURAL POLICE STATION
BHADRAVATHI
REP BY SPP
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BENGALURU - 560 001
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. VIJAYKUMAR MAJAGE, SPP-II A/W;
SRI. SUDHINDRA B.S., HCGP )


THIS CRL.A FILED U/S 374(2) CR.P C TO SET ASIDE THE
JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION DATED 30.01.2020 AND
SENTENCE DATED 31.01.2020 PASSED BY THE IV ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, SHIMOGA, SITTING AT

Digitally signed
by
SHARADAVANI
B
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59954-DB
CRL.A No. 15 of 2021

CNR: KAHC010127422020



BHADRAVATHI IN S.C.NO.5004/2016, CONVICTING THE
APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.1 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A
AND 302 OF IPC.
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)

This appeal is preferred by the accused against the
judgment of the trial Court, convicting and sentencing him
for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 498A
of IPC.

2. The charges were framed against accused
Nos.1 and 2 for the offences punishable under Sections
498A, 304B and 302 r/w Section 34 of IPC and Section 4
of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for short "DP Act").

3. To establish the charges, the prosecution got
examined PWs.1 to 22 and got marked Exhibits P1 to

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59954-DB
CRL.A No. 15 of 2021

CNR: KAHC010127422020



P35 and MOs. 1 to 5. The defense got marked Exhibits D1
to D3.

4. Appreciating the oral and evidentiary evidence
on record, the trial Court acquitted accused No.2 of all the
charges and also acquitted accused No.1 of the offences
punishable under Section 304B of IPC and Section 4 of DP
Act. The trial Court convicted accused No.1 for the offence
punishable under Section 498-A and 302 of IPC holding
that the prosecution has proved that he has subjected the
deceased to cruelty and caused her death.

5. Insofar as accused No.2, the Trial Court has
held that there is no material with respect to the
allegations made against her. The reasons and findings
recorded insofar as accused No.2 is concerned, has
become final, as there is no challenge to it by the State.

6. It is the case of the prosecution that deceased
Rukmini, daughter of the complainant-Nagarajappa,
married the accused on 04.07.2012 at Sunnadahalli

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59954-DB
CRL.A No. 15 of 2021

CNR: KAHC010127422020



Shri.Anjaneyaswamy Temple, and it was a love marriage.
Accused No.1, her husband, and accused No.2, her
mother-in-law, used to harass and ill-treat her by not
providing food, etc., on the ground that she had not
brought any dowry. They were subjecting her to cruelty
both physically and mentally, insisting her to bring dowry
from her parents' house. On 14.09.2015 at about
11.30 a.m., when the deceased was preparing to go to her
parents' house, by packing her clothes, accused No.1 with
an intention to kill her, tied a ribbon thread around her
neck and committed her murder.

7. The law was set into motion by the father of the
deceased. Complaint is marked as Ex.P12. The complaint
averments reveal that on 14.09.2015 at about 12.00 p.m.,
complainant's son Danesh (PW.6) and one Mylarappa
(PW.14) had been to the matrimonial house of the
deceased. At that time, both the accused were quarrelling
with the deceased, inside the room. When the accused
came out, they entered the room and saw the deceased in

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59954-DB
CRL.A No. 15 of 2021

CNR: KAHC010127422020



a lying position and she was found to be dead. The
complainant further alleged the physical and mental
harassment meted out to the deceased by the accused
and stated that the panchayats were held by the village
elders in that regard.
8. The accused denied all the incriminating evidence
appeared against him while he was examined under
Section 313 Cr.P.C. He filed a written statement stating
that at the time of incident, he was not present in the
house and when he returned at about 12.00 in the noon,
he heard the cry of his children from inside the house. His
wife did not open the door and therefore, he forcibly
opened the door and found his wife hanging to the ceiling
fan. Immediately, he called the neighbours,
Smt. Lakshmi W/o Karunandhi and Smt.Manjula W/o
Lokesh. They brought down the body and when they were
intending to shift her to the hospital, she was found to be
dead. Thereafter, he informed the matter to her family
members.

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59954-DB
CRL.A No. 15 of 2021

CNR: KAHC010127422020



9. The trial Court rejected the defense of the
accused observing that, the accused would have taken
such a defense in the course of cross-examination of
material witnesses who made allegations against them.
Further, it is not stated as to what was the object used by
the deceased for hanging and it is not elicited as to what
was the reason for the deceased to commit suicide by
hanging.
10. The fact that the marriage of the deceased and
the accused was a love marriage, is not in dispute. In
Ex.P12 itself, complainant has stated that the deceased
and accused were in love and they got their marriage
registered at the Office of the Sub-Registrar, Bhadravathi.
The allegations are that after the marriage, the accused
was subjecting the deceased to cruelty insisting her to
bring dowry from her parental home. PW.5, mother of the
deceased, PWs.6 and 11, brothers of the deceased,
PWs.15 and 16, uncles of the deceased have all deposed
that the accused was subjecting the deceased to cruelty

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59954-DB
CRL.A No. 15 of 2021

CNR: KAHC010127422020



and he was harassing her and in this regard they had even
held panchayats. Ex.P10 is the complaint lodged by the
deceased alleging physical and mental torture meted out
to her by the accused. She has stated that the accused
was addicted to drinking habits and he used to abuse and
assault her and not provide food and medicine to her and
children. There is no allegation made alleging dowry
demand. The accused was advised by the police not to
quarrel with the deceased and with an undertaking given
by him, the said complaint was closed.
11. The evidence of PWs.5, 6, 11, 13 and 14 would
demonstrate that the deceased was being subjected to
physical and mental torture by the accused. The accused
was addicted to drinking habits and he was ill-treating the
deceased. Their evidence coupled with Ex.P10, the earlier
complaint lodged by the deceased clearly establish the
ingredients of Section 498A of IPC.

- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59954-DB
CRL.A No. 15 of 2021

CNR: KAHC010127422020



12. To convict the accused for the offence punishable
under Section 302 of IPC, the trial Court has held at
paragraph Nos.47 to 49 as under:
“ 47. Even if all these loopholes in the prosecution
case, one thing is not denied by the accused
persons that deceased died while she was residing
in their house on 14.9.2015. As I already discussed
above, there is no defence against the accused
with respect to the allegation made against them
as to the cause of death of deceased Rukmini. No
doubt the defence counsel has disproved the
presence of PW.6 and PW.14 at the time of alleged
incident on 14.9.2015 in the house of accused.
But, the prosecution has proved that deceased
died when she was residing with the accused
persons on 14.9.2015 and there was 2 contusions
over left occipital region, abrasion over left cheek,
right eye brow and multiple injuries over both fore
arm. No doubt as argued by the learned Advocate
for the accused, doctor had directly sent this
document to the I.O., not to the court. But,
nothing has been elicited from the mouth of doctor
to say that he had not conducted the Postmortem
and he gave report at the instance of police by
mentioning these external injuries.

- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59954-DB
CRL.A No. 15 of 2021

CNR: KAHC010127422020




48. Even in Ex.P.1- inquest mahazar also it is
shown that there were two contusion injuries on
the back of the head, PW.5, PW.6 and PW.14 have
deposed about these injuries found on the dead
body. Nothing has been elicited from their mouth
to disbelieve their version. So, the prosecution has
proved that there was injuries on the dead body of
Rukmini as mentioned in Ex.P.1 inquest mahazar
and Ex.P.20- Postmortem report.

49. PW.1 - Kuberappa, PW.5- Smt.Deviramma,
PW.6-Danesh, PW.11-Mahantesha, PW.12-
Krishnappa and PW.14-Mailarappa have also
deposed about ligature mark found on the front of
neck of deceased. In Ex.P.1 - inquest mahazar it is
stated that there was ligature mark on the left side
of neck. In Ex.P.20-Postmortem report it is shown
about ligature mark, which was oblique
incomplete, measuring 20 x 1 c.m. present over
front, left side and left side back of upper and
middle part of neck situated 7 c.m. below left ear
lobe 6 c.m. below chin and 1.5 c.m. below
posterior hairline. Nothing has been elicited from
the mouth of these witnesses to say that there was
no such ligature mark. PW.17-doctor in his cross-
examination deposed that these ligature marks
could be caused if rope is tied around neck.

- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59954-DB
CRL.A No. 15 of 2021

CNR: KAHC010127422020



Further he admitted that he had shown in the
Postmortem report -Ex.P.20 that those ligature
marks were down gradient and those could be
caused if while hanging to a fan or beem, the
hanging hook comes down, and he has not stated
in his report that there was a ligature mark around
the neck. Whether the ligature mark was down
gradient or it was oblique incomplete, the fact that
there was ligature marks on the neck of the neck
of the deceased was stand proved. It is the
accused who has to show how there was injuries
on the head and also body of deceased and
ligature marks on her neck. “

13. The trial Court has further held that, the
deceased was in the custody of accused No.1 on the date
of incident and there is no defence by the accused about
the cause of death. For the first time in the course of
cross-examination of PW.13, he has taken a defence that
deceased had committed suicide by hanging.
14. It is not in dispute that Rukmini died in her
matrimonial home. As per the defence taken by the
accused, he was not present in the house and when he

- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59954-DB
CRL.A No. 15 of 2021

CNR: KAHC010127422020



returned home at about 12.00 noon, his children were
crying and the door of the house was closed. He forcibly
opened the door and when he entered the house, saw his
wife in a hanging position. He immediately called his
neighbours Smt.Lakshmi and Smt.Manjula and removed
the knot and when they were about to shift his wife to the
hospital, they found that she was dead.
15. Ex.P20 is the PM report. Post mortem
examination is conducted by PW.17. As per the final
opinion furnished by him, cause of death is " Asphiyxia due
to compression of neck by ligature ."
16. According to the prosecution, PW6 -Danesh and
his friend PW.14-Mylarappa went to the house of the
accused at about 12.00 noon on 14.09.2015. At that
time, they heard the sound of quarrelling from inside the
house and after some time, the accused came out of the
house. When they went inside, they saw the dead body of
Rukmini lying on the bed and also noticed injury on the

- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59954-DB
CRL.A No. 15 of 2021

CNR: KAHC010127422020



back of her head and the ligature mark in the neck and
broken bangle pieces. PW.6 has stated that he enquired
with the neighbour namely Mrs. Lakshmi, who informed
him that for the last 3 to 4 days, the accused was
physically assaulting the deceased. Similarly, PW.14 has
deposed in his evidence that when he along with
PW.6-Danesh had been to the house of the accused, the
accused and the deceased were quarrelling inside the
house and after about 10 minutes, the accused came out
of the house. When they went inside, they found the dead
body of Rukmini and noticed injury on her head and a
ligature mark on her neck. The neighbours informed that
for the last 2-3 days, the accused was quarrelling with
Rukmini.
17. According to prosecution, PW6 and PW14 went
to the house of the accused at about 12:00 p.m., on
14.09.2015. In his cross-examination, PW6 has stated
that on 14.09.2015 at about 10:30 a.m., he left the village
on a motorcycle, along with PW14 and reached the house

- 13 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59954-DB
CRL.A No. 15 of 2021

CNR: KAHC010127422020



of the accused at about 11:15 a.m. Contrary to the same,
PW14, in his cross-examination has stated that
PW6-Danesh and himself had left their village at about
05:00 p.m. in the evening and reached the house of the
accused at about 07:00 p.m. PW11-brother of PW6 has
stated that he received a phone call from his brother-
Danesh and PW14-Mylarappa during the night hours of
14.09.2015, informing him that the accused have
committed the murder of Rukmini.
18. The above contradictions in the evidence of PW6
and PW14 raise a reasonable doubt in the mind of the
Court with regard to both of them going to the house of
the accused at about 12:00 noon on 14.09.2015. Even
otherwise, it is evident from their evidence that they have
not seen the accused committing the murder of Rukmini
by strangulating her with MO5-ribbon (thread). They have
stated that on enquiry, the neighbours informed them
that the accused and the deceased have been quarrelling
for the past 2-3 days.

- 14 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59954-DB
CRL.A No. 15 of 2021

CNR: KAHC010127422020



19. The accused was arrested on 15.9.2015. On his
arrest, the I.O. has not recorded his voluntary statement.
The I.O.-PW20 has stated that after the arrest, the
accused was produced before the Court and he was taken
into police custody on 29.9.2015 and recorded his
voluntary statement as per Ex.P28. Based on the
voluntary statement, a green colour ribbon tape i.e., MO.5
was seized from a drawer inside his house under a
mahazar at Ex.P17.
20. The prosecution has got examined PW8 and
PW10-the panch witnesses to Ex.P17. Their evidence do
not reveal that the voluntary statement of the accused
was recorded in their presence. They have not stated that
the accused led them and the police to his house and
removed MO5 from the drawer. Their evidence only shows
taking of photographs marked as Exs.P18 and P19,
wherein the accused was seen holding MO5.

- 15 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59954-DB
CRL.A No. 15 of 2021

CNR: KAHC010127422020



21. PW17 has given his opinion regarding the
ligature material, i.e., green colour synthetic piece of cloth
(like a rope). He has opined that (i) it is possible to
sustain such a ligature mark mentioned in the post
mortem report (ii) possibility of causing death of a human
being by application of force around the neck by the given
material cannot be completely ruled out. In the cross
examination, PW17 has stated that if a person is
strangulated with a rope, there is a possibility of ligature
mark around the neck. It is elicited that in the post
mortem report, he has mentioned that the ligature mark
was downwards and if a person commits suicide by
hanging, such a mark is possible.
22. We have perused the post mortem report. As
per which, the ligature mark was oblique incomplete
ligature mark measuring 20 x 1 cm. present over front,
left side, back of upper and middle part of the neck. There
was no ligature mark completely encircling the neck. This
assumes importance, because according to the defense of

- 16 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59954-DB
CRL.A No. 15 of 2021

CNR: KAHC010127422020



the accused, on entering the house, he saw his wife
hanging from a ceiling fan. He immediately called the
neighbours namely Mrs.Lakshmi and Mrs.Manjulamma.
They brought down the body and found that Rukmini was
dead. Mrs.Lakshmi is examined as PW13. She has
deposed that Rukmini committed suicide by hanging, but
stated that, she was not aware as to for what reason she
committed suicide by hanging. She was treated hostile by
the prosecution. In the cross-examination, she has stated
that when Rukmini died, there was no one present in the
house. She and Manjulamma saw her for the first time.
The door was closed and the children were weeping inside
the house. The accused also came to the house for lunch
and they forcibly opened the door and found Rukmini
hanging to the ceiling fan. When they were about to shift
the dead body to the hospital, she breathed her last.
23. From the above evidence and material on
record, we are of the opinion that the trial Court was not
justified in convicting the accused for the offence

- 17 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59954-DB
CRL.A No. 15 of 2021

CNR: KAHC010127422020



punishable under Section 302 IPC. However, there is
sufficient material to show that the accused was subjecting
the deceased to physical and mental cruelty, attracting the
ingredients of Section 498A of IPC. Hence, the conviction
and sentence passed by the trial Court for the offence
punishable under Section 498A IPC is justified.
24. For the foregoing reasons, we pass the
following:
ORDER
i. Appeal is allowed-in-part .
ii. The Judgment dated 30.01.2020 and the Order
on Sentence dated 31.01.2020, convicting and sentencing
the appellant/accused No.1 for the offence punishable
under Section 302 of IPC is set aside .
iii. The judgment and order of conviction and
sentence passed for the offence punishable under Section
498A of IPC is confirmed.

- 18 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59954-DB
CRL.A No. 15 of 2021

CNR: KAHC010127422020



iv. The accused is in custody. He has already
undergone the sentence imposed against him for the
offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC. Hence, he
shall be released forthwith from the prison, if not required
in any other case.
v. The District Legal Services Committee,
Shivamogga, shall determine adequate compensation to
be awarded to PW5-Smt.Deviramma, mother of the
deceased, under the Karnataka Victim Compensation
Scheme, within a period of three months.
Copy of the judgment shall be communicated to the
concerned Jail Authority and the Member Secretary, DLSA,
Shivamogga.

Sd/-
(MOHAMMAD NAWAZ)
JUDGE


Sd/-
(B.PRAMOD)
JUDGE

BSV/TL
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19