Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.32 seconds)
Sri Narasimhamurthy vs State Of Karnataka on 21 June, 2022 cites

Pappi @ Mahboob vs The State Of Rajasthan on 5 February, 2019

The same has been addressed in the case of Pappi @ Mehboob v. State of Rajasthan (LNIND 2019 SC 2150). In the instant case accused - Narasimha Murthy who is no other than the husband of deceased and the marriage was performed as per the customs prevailed in their society but within a span of 7 years from the date of marriage she last her breath but for the death of Lakshamma, her father PW.1 who had initiated criminal prosecution against the accused 47 by filing complaint at Ex.P1. But the evidence of PW.1 compared with the evidence of PW.8 - Doctor who conducted autopsy over the dead body and inclusive of evidence of PWs.4 and 5 with the evidence of PW.13 - Sanna Thimmappa who is the investigating officer but the trial Court rendering conviction judgment against this accused - Narasimhamurthy for the offence under Section 302 of IPC. But held that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt against this accused as well as co-accused Nos.2 and 3 relating to the ingredients of Sections 3 and 4 of the D.P.Act and so also, the offences under Sections 498A and 304B r/w 34 of IPC. But found guilty against the accused - Narasimhamurthy for the offence under Section 302 of IPC. Similarly not found guilty against this accused in respect of Sections 3 and 4 of the DP Act and inclusive of Sections 498A and 304B of IPC. At a cursory glance of all these witnesses on the part of the prosecution there shall be same clouds of doubt it would arise in the mind of the Court. But when clouds of doubt arise, in a 48 criminal justice delivery system, the benefit of doubt should always be in favour of the accused and even if two views are possible to arrival of conclusion, but the view in favour of the accused by extending the benefit of doubt it is always in favour of the accused alone. Therefore, in this appeal we are of the opinion that the prosecution has failed to establish the guilt against accused - Narasimhamurthy by facilitating worthwhile evidence to secure the conviction for the offence under Section 302 of IPC. In a criminal trial insofar as murder trial it requires to be established the guilt of the accused by facilitating positive, corroborative, cogent and consistent evidence to probabalise that the accused had caused for the death of deceased in terms of murder. But in the instant case, no ingredients relating to Section 302 of IPC has been established by the prosecution by facilitating worthwhile evidence and there is no other view to say that accused No.1 - Narasimhamurthy is deserving for acquittal for the 49 offence under Section 302 of IPC. In view of the aforesaid reasons and findings we proceed to pass the following:
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 10 - Cited by 1 - A M Khanwilkar - Full Document
1