SURESH vs STATE OF KARNATAKA

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57453-DB
CRL.A No. 479 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010165202020




IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

TH
DATED THIS THE 13 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026


PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.PRAMOD

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 479 OF 2020 (C)


BETWEEN:

SURESH
S/O NARAYANNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
TH
R/O 9 CROSS,
RAGIGUDDA,
SHIVAMOGGA.
…APPELLANT

(BY SRI. GIRISH M. PATIL, ADVOCATE (V/C))

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY RURAL POLICE, SHIVAMOGGA
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT UNIT,
DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-560 001.
…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. VIJAYKUMAR MAJAGE, SPP-II A/W
SRI. SUDHINDRA B.S., HCGP)

THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S 374 CR.PC., PRAYING TO:
(1) CALL FOR RECORDS IN SC NO.166/17 ON THE FILE OF
PRINCIPAL SESSIONS JUDGE AT SHIVAMOGGA; (2) EXAMINE









Digitally
signed by
LAKSHMI T
Location:
High Court
of Karnataka

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57453-DB
CRL.A No. 479 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010165202020


THE SAME AND TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF
CONVICTION DATED 06.05.2019 IN S.C.NO.166/2017 PASSED
BY THE LEARNED PRINCIPAL SESSIONS JUDGE AT
SHIVAMOGGA HOLDING THE ACCUSED GUILTY FOR THE
OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S 302 IPC AND ACCUSED WAS
SENTENCED FOR LIFE IMPRISONMENT AND ALSO ORDERED
PAYMENT OF FINE OF RS.10,000/- WITH DEFAULT SENTENCE
BY ACQUITTING THE ACCUSED OF THE AFORESAID CHARGES
WITH ALLOWING THIS APPEAL WITH EXEMPLARY COSTS.


THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FURTHER 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 judgment and order of conviction and sentence
passed by the trial Court for the offence punishable under
Section 302 IPC, is assailed by the accused in this appeal.
2. The trial court has sentenced the accused to
undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-
and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo SI for
a period of 3 months.

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57453-DB
CRL.A No. 479 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010165202020


3. We have heard Sri. Girish M. Patil, learned
counsel for the appellant, Sri Vijaya Kumar Majage,
learned SPP-II for the State. Perused the evidence and
material on record.
4. Brief facts of the case:- the first informant
Nagaratna is the wife of the accused. They were living
along with their children at Shanthinagara, Raagigudda,
Shivamogga. For the past 8 years, first informant's
brother- Papanna (deceased) was living along with them.
They had some property at Milaghatta. The accused was
addicted to drinking habits. He used to quarrel with his
wife demanding share in the property. When the deceased
used to intervene, he was threatening that he would
commit their murder. On 04.05.2017 at about 03:00 p.m.,
the accused returned to the house and saw his wife
serving food to the deceased, he told his wife that the
deceased is not giving share in the property, therefore,
she should not serve food to him. He started quarreling
with his wife and assaulted her with hands. When the

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57453-DB
CRL.A No. 479 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010165202020


deceased intervened, he took scissors from the kitchen,
stabbed him on his chest, neck etc. On seeing the
neighbours approaching, he ran away from the spot
holding the scissors. The injured was shifted to the
Mc. Gann Hospital, Shivamogga. However, he was
declared brought dead.
5. On the basis of a complaint-Ex.P6 lodged by the
wife of the accused, PW8 registered a case against the
accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC.
Investigation was taken over by PW12-PI. He conducted
the spot mahazar- Ex.P7, prepared the sketch and
conducted the inquest proceedings. The investigation was
then taken over by PW10-CPI. The accused, who had
surrendered before the Court, was taken into police
custody. His voluntary statement-Ex.P24 was recorded by
PW12. The blood stained shirt and the scissors were seized
at his instance, under a mahazar-Ex.P15, in the presence
of panch witnesses. On his transfer, PW12 handed over
the investigation to PW11-CPI. PW11 collected the P.M.

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57453-DB
CRL.A No. 479 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010165202020


examination report and sent the seized articles for FSL
examination. Upon completion of the investigation, he filed
the charge sheet.
6. After committal of the case to the Court of
Sessions, charges were framed against the accused for the
offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. The accused
pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
7. To establish the charge, the prosecution got
examined 12 witnesses and got marked 31 documents and
5 material objects.
8. On appreciation of the oral and documentary
evidence on record, the trial Court came to the conclusion
that in Ex.P6- complaint, there is specific recital that on
demand of share in the properties of the parents of
complainant, accused used to quarrel with the complainant
as well as the deceased and he had assaulted the
complainant with hands prior to the said incident and
when deceased had intervened, he went inside the kitchen

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57453-DB
CRL.A No. 479 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010165202020


and brought scissors. That act of the accused is sufficient
to prove his intention and from going through the injuries
sustained by the deceased, it is clear that he has assaulted
on the vital part of the body i.e., over near left ear of the
deceased and from another injury, scissors touched the
heart. Therefore, it cannot be said that the incident
happened upon a sudden quarrel and without pre-
meditation and it has been committed in the heat of
passion. Further held that, after the incident the accused
ran away from the scene of offence along with the weapon
and he concealed the weapon as well as shirt worn by him,
which was blood stained, which is sufficient to come to the
conclusion that the act caused by the accused is
premeditated and it is not as a result of heat of passion.
9. The learned counsel for the appellant contended
that, as per prosecution, the complainant i.e., the wife of
the accused is an eyewitness, but there are material
discrepancies, contradictions and improvements in her
evidence. He contended that she could not be an

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57453-DB
CRL.A No. 479 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010165202020


eyewitness, since she has admitted in the cross
examination that she works in a factory and she attends
the second shift, which is from 02:00 p.m. to 09:45 p.m.
Hence, her presence at the spot is doubtful, since the
incident had taken place at about 04:30 p.m. Further
contended that in the complaint she has not alleged that
the accused stabbed the deceased on his chest. On the
other hand, she has mentioned about one injury caused to
the neck, which raises a doubt about her presence in the
house.
10. He contended that during her deposition before
the Court, the complainant has materially improved her
statement made in the complaint, by deposing that the
accused had stabbed on the chest of the deceased. The
learned counsel further contended that the panch
witnesses to the seizure mahazar, examined as PW5 and
PW.6 have turned hostile and therefore, the recovery
evidence is also not proved by the prosecution.

- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57453-DB
CRL.A No. 479 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010165202020


11. It is further contended that even accepting the
case of the prosecution, the accused had no intention to
commit the murder. He did not quarrel with the deceased,
on the other hand, while he was quarreling with his wife,
the deceased intervened and in the heat of passion and on
grave and sudden provocation, he had caused injuries to
the deceased which has resulted in his death. Hence, he
contended that the offence committed by the accused
would fall within the definition of culpable homicide not
amounting to murder, punishable under Section 304 Part
II of IPC. In support of his contention, he relied on the
judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Mavila Thamban
Nambiar v. State of Kerala , reported in 1997 (1)
Supreme 452 .
12. Per contra, learned SPP-II contended that the
complainant is the wife of the accused and she is an
eyewitness to the incident. Her presence in the house is
natural. She has lodged the complaint immediately without
loss of time, naming her husband as the one who

- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57453-DB
CRL.A No. 479 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010165202020


committed the murder. He contended that the discrepancy
pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellant does
not go to the root of the prosecution case, since the name
of the accused is mentioned in the complaint and in her
deposition, the complainant-PW2 has categorically stated
that the accused has inflicted injuries on the neck as well
as on the chest of the deceased. He contended that, as per
the PM report, the cause of death is on account of injury to
the heart. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the appeal.
13. Exhibit P6-complaint is lodged by the wife of the
accused, wherein she has stated that her husband was
addicted to alcohol and used to assault her frequently and
was demanding share in the property. She has further
stated that the accused used to assault her brother
(deceased) and whenever her brother used to advise the
accused, he was threatening that he would kill him as well
as his sister. On the date of incident i.e. on 04.05.2017 at
about 03:00 p.m. when the accused returned to the
house, he heard the deceased telling her to serve him

- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57453-DB
CRL.A No. 479 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010165202020


food. At that time, the accused stating that deceased was
not giving share in the property, told her not to serve food
to him. Thereafter, he started quarreling and assaulted
her. Her brother (deceased) tried to pacify the quarrel. At
that time, the accused went to the kitchen and brought
the scissors and stabbed the deceased on the left side of
his neck.
14. As per PM report, the deceased had sustained the
following injuries:
i) 1.6 x 0.5cms x skull cavity deep (1.6cms) over
left face, 1 cm in front of tragus;
ii) 2 x 0.5 cms abrasion present over upper neck,
oblique and upwards to right, 3 cms above
Adam's apple;
iii) 2.1 x 0.2cms abrasion over left neck, lower
aspect, 1 cm above head of left clavicle;
iv) 1.6 x 0.8 cms x left ventricle cavity deep
penetration wound in between 5th and 6th ribs -
upward enters thorax and penetrating
pericardium - left ventricle and
v) 1.2x0.7 cms abrasion callar 0.5 cms below
injury No.4.

- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57453-DB
CRL.A No. 479 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010165202020


15. The doctor who conducted the postmortem
examination has opined that the death is due to cardiac
tamponade secondary to injury to the heart. It is no doubt
true, the complainant has not mentioned about the
accused stabbing the deceased with the scissors on his
chest. That itself is not sufficient to hold that she was not
an eyewitness to the incident. During the inquest
proceedings, the witnesses whose statements are recorded
have categorically stated regarding the complainant
informing them that the accused had stabbed the
deceased on the chest as well as on the neck. In her
deposition, she has clearly stated that the accused had
stabbed on the chest as well as on the left side of the neck
of the deceased. She has denied the suggestion put to her
that she was not at all present at the spot. Her evidence
would reveal that she herself took the deceased to the
hospital.
16. The prosecution has examined PW7-Sarojamma
an eyewitness to the incident, but she has not supported

- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57453-DB
CRL.A No. 479 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010165202020


the case of the prosecution. However, her evidence goes
to show that on hearing the screams of the complainant-
PW2, she came out of the house and then came to know
that the accused had stabbed the deceased with scissors.
17. The incident took place on 04.05.2017 at about
04:30 p.m. The accused surrendered before the Court on
09.05.2017. He was taken into custody by the IO and his
voluntary statement was recorded as per Ex.P24. At his
instance, scissors (MO.1) and a shirt (MO2) were seized
under a mahazar-Exhibit P15. The panch witnesses
examined as PW5 and PW.6 to the seizure mahazar have
turned hostile. However, the Investigation Officer-PW.10
who conducted the seizure mahazar has deposed about
the seizure of MO1 and MO2. The said material objects
were sent for FSL examination and as per the FSL report-
Ex.P22, they were stained with human blood. The blood
stains found on those articles and the clothes of the
deceased were matching, as they were stained with B
Group blood.

- 13 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57453-DB
CRL.A No. 479 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010165202020


18. PW2, the wife of the accused has narrated the
incident in the complaint as well as in her deposition. She
has shown the spot to the investigating officer. She has
stated that the accused used to consume alcohol and
quarrel with her demanding share in the property. As per
the complaint averments, on the date of incident when the
accused returned to his house, he saw his wife serving
food to the deceased. He picked up a quarrel with his wife
stating that she should not serve food to the deceased,
since he was not giving share in the property. If the
contents of the complaint and the deposition of PW2 are
perused, after the accused returned home, he picked up
quarrel with his wife and not with the deceased. The
material on record shows that the accused had not
premeditated the act, on the other hand, in the heat of
passion, without pre-meditation, he took a pair of scissors
and inflicted injuries to the deceased. As per the RFSL and
Histopathological reports, presence of ethyl alcohol
contents were found in the blood of the deceased. The

- 14 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57453-DB
CRL.A No. 479 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010165202020


incident taking place on account of a sudden quarrel is
very much established from the evidence of PW2. In the
facts and circumstances, it cannot be held that the act
committed by the accused would fall within the definition
of murder.
19. However, the contention of the learned counsel
for the appellant that the offence committed by the
accused would fall under Section 304 Part II of IPC cannot
be accepted. In the judgment relied upon by the learned
counsel, in the case of Mavila Thamban Nambiar
(supra), the accused therein had given one blow with a
pair of scissors, hence the conviction was altered from
Section 302 to Section 304 Part II of IPC. In the case on
hand, we have noticed from the PM report that the
deceased had sustained abrasion over the neck and injury
on the left ventricle cavity deep penetration wound
entering the thorax and penetrating the pericardium-left
ventricle. The cause of death is due to cardiac tamponade
secondary to injury to the heart. Accordingly, the

- 15 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57453-DB
CRL.A No. 479 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010165202020


conviction is altered from Section 302 IPC to Section 304
Part I of IPC.
ORDER
i) The appeal is allowed-in-part .
ii) The judgment of conviction and order on
sentence dated 06.05.2019 passed by the
Court of Principal Sessions Judge,
Shivamogga, in SC.No.166/2017,
convicting and sentencing the
accused/appellant for the offence
punishable under Section 302 of IPC, is set
aside.
iii) The accused is convicted for the offence
punishable under Section 304 Part I of IPC.
iv) He is sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for 8 years and to pay fine
of Rs.10,000/-, and in default of payment

- 16 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57453-DB
CRL.A No. 479 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010165202020


of fine, shall undergo SI for a period of six
months.
v) He is entitled to set-off for the period of
detention already undergone by him.
The order shall be communicated to the trial Court
and the Jail authority.

Sd/-
(MOHAMMAD NAWAZ)
JUDGE


Sd/-
(B.PRAMOD)
JUDGE




HB,MKM
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6