Karnataka High Court Upholds Convict's Life Sentence For Murdering Man Having Illicit Relationship With His Wife
The Karnataka High Court has upheld the conviction for murder and sentence of life imprisonment of a man, who ran over his neighbor (Jyothiba) for involvement in an illicit relationship with his wife.A division bench of Justice HP Sandesh and Justice Ramachandra D Huddar dismissed the appellant's plea, noting that the chain of events clearly pointed to the guilt of the appellant, who fled...
The Karnataka High Court has upheld the conviction for murder and sentence of life imprisonment of a man, who ran over his neighbor (Jyothiba) for involvement in an illicit relationship with his wife.
A division bench of Justice HP Sandesh and Justice Ramachandra D Huddar dismissed the appellant's plea, noting that the chain of events clearly pointed to the guilt of the appellant, who fled from the spot rather than taking the victims (Jyothiba and his father) to a hospital.
“When the accident occurred, he being the neighbour, if he had not indulged in an act of committing the murder and it was merely an accident, he ought not to have fled away from the place of accident. An ordinary prudent man, when there was an accident, he would have helped to shift injured persons to the hospital, since he is acquainted with victims 1 and 2 being his neighbours. But he has not done so. This conduct has to be taken note of.”
The appellant, who reportedly also assaulted the victims with a club, had contended that the Trial Court overlooked the fact that prosecution witnesses turned hostile. He argued that motive for commission of offence was not proved.
On going through the evidence, the Bench noted that the appellant and victims were neighbors. There was enmity between them with regard to the illicit relationship of victim-Jyothiba with the appellant's wife.
“Witnesses have spoken with regard to enmity between them on account of alleged illicit relationship between the accused wife and also the deceased Jyothiba. This might have prompted the accused no.1 to eliminate deceased Jyothiba. Therefore accused no.1 might have taken this step of causing an accident and might have assaulted the deceased. In his process the father of accused no.1 also became the victim in the hands of accused no.1.”
The court observed that as per the medical evidence, both deceased had sustained accidental injuries as well as injuries from assault.
“From the evidence of this witness (Doctor), it is very much clear that, cause of death was due to assault and also accidental injuries. He gave his opinion as per Exs.P40 and P41 stating that, the injuries mentioned in Ex.P35 i.e. injury Nos.1 and 2 were due to assault and injury Nos.3 and 4 are due to road traffic accident. Other injuries found victims body Jyothiba i.e. injury Nos.1 to 3 found in Ex.P36 are due to assault and injury No.4 is due to RTA.”
It was also considered that the club used to assault the victims was recovered at the instance of the appellant/accused.
As such, the court opined, “If it is an accident and when the victims are sitting on the motorcycle, questions of sustaining similar injuries by both the victims do not arise at all. Hence it is clear that these injuries are on account of assault. Medical evidence supports the case of the prosecution.”
Rejecting the contentions of the appellant countering motive, the court said, “To disprove the case of prosecution, to prove the defence, there was no difficulty to examine the wife of accused no.1. She would have been the best witness to disbelieve the enmity brought on record by the prosecution if she is living along with the accused as contended in the defence while cross-examining the prosecution witnesses. Therefore a story of the defence cannot be accepted.”
Advocate KS Patil for Appellant
Additional Public Prosecutor MB Gundwade for State
Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 458
Case Title: Sanju v. The State of Karnataka, CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.100297/2019