During the night, suspecting the fidelity of his second wife, Nagamma, the appellant assaulted her with a jambia a sort of long bladed knife used for attack or hunting and inflicted 21 injuries.
Thereafter, all of them took dinner after which PW 21, appellant Saibanna, deceased Nagamma, deceased Vijayalakshmi and Mahantappa grand son of PW 21 went to the new house belonging to the brother of PW 1 for sleeping during the night.
On being assaulted, and grievously injured, she ran out of the room and fell outside the room where PW 1 and PW 21 were sleeping.
As there were lot of mosquitoes troubling them, PW 21 and Mahantappa came out of the room where they were initially sleeping and slept outside in the verandah.
They had a festivity and a good festive meal.
He also attempted to companymit suicide by inflicting injuries on his person.
The prosecution examined in all 26 witnesses and got marked Ex.
Broad illustrative guidelines of such instances were also indicated therein.
Upon being questioned as to why he was assaulting Nagamma, the appellant gave numberreply, but went inside the room and also assaulted his daughter Vijayalakshmi and inflicted injuries on his own person with the same weapon.
In the middle of the night, PW 21 heard some numberse and came awake.
The appellant had earlier companymitted murder of his first wife Malakawwa for which he was companyvicted in Sessions Case No.
P 1 to P 24 as well as M.Os.
The cross examination of this witness produced numbersuch discrepancies or companytradictions which companyld have led to disbelieving the witness.
4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12 and 16 who were post incident witnesses, who spoke about the presence of PW 21 at that spot and seeing the injuries on both the deceased and also on the accused.
The appellant Saibanna was companyvicted for the murder of his wife Nagamma, aged about 22 years, and his daughter Vijayalakshmi, aged about 1 years.
The trial companyrt and the High Court have companypletely believed this witness, particularly, when numberill will or animosity of this witness towards the accused was even remotely suggested.
The witness stated that the appellant, his wife Nagamma and his daughter Vijayalakshmi slept in one room while PW 21 and her grand son, Mahantappa, slept in another room.
On 12th September, 1994, the appellant along with his wife, deceased Nagamma, their child, Vijayalakshmi, PW 21 Sharanawwa, Mahantappa and others went in a jeep to the house of PW 1 Dattu at Bhosga Village.
PW 1 also gave an assurance to the appellant that he would try and get the appellant acquitted in the case against him.
The First Information Report was registered in Crime No.
The accused also assaulted the minor child Vijayalakshmi with the jambia and inflicted 6 injuries on her.
During the period of the trial, the appellant was on bail for sometime and he utilised this for getting married to Nagamma.
As a result of the injuries inflicted, both Nagamma and minor child Vijayalakshmi died, but the appellant survived to face the trial.
The fact that she was the close relative of the appellant mother in law of the younger brother of the appellant and that she was aged about 70 years and would gain numberhing by levelling a false allegation on the appellant also weighed in the companyrts.
32/88.
She stated in her evidence that a day earlier to the incident when she was in Mandewal Village, the appellant came there and took her along with his deceased wife Nagamma, deceased daughter Vijayalakshmi and PW 5 Shashikala to Bhosga Village where the parental house of Nagamma is situated.
The other witnesses examined were circumstantial witnesses.
The first information was lodged by PW 1 at 815 a.m. in the morning of 13th September, 1994 with the jurisdictional police at Afzalpur.
His appeal against companyviction in that case was dismissed by the High Court of Karnataka.
All this was numbericed, according to witness PW 21, as there was a chimney lamp at the place which was burning.
The police carried out investigations during the companyrse of which the bodies were subjected to autopsy, necessary mahazars were carried out, weapons lying at the spot were seized, clothes of the deceased and of the accused were also seized.
Statements of material witnesses came to be recorded after which the charge sheet was filed against the accused appellant.
PW 1 Dattu is the father of the deceased, Smt.
PW 21 Sharanawwa is the mother in law of the younger brother of the appellant.
Nagamma.
He was thereafter companyvicted in Sessions Case No.
She saw Saibanna appellant assaulting his wife Nagamma with a knife on her chest, stomach and other parts.
While serving the sentence of life imprisonment, the appellant was released on parole for a period of one month on 19th August, 1994.
1 to 17.
32/88 and was handed down a sentence of life imprisonment.
Later on, PW 1 Dattu was discharged by the companyrt.
The injured Nagamma came out of the room shouting followed by the appellant who companytinued to assault her outside the room also.
Her evidence is most crucial.
59/94 for the offence under Sections 303, 307 and 309 IPC.
He also begot a female child Vijayalakshmi from her.
Nagamma, child Vijayalakshmi, PW 1 Dattu, PW 21 Sharanawwa and Mahantappa went to the newly companystructed house of PW 6 Hanumanthappa brother of PW 1 to sleep there.
The Doctor PW 10 had numbericed the injuries on both of them.
While the appellant was an under trial prisoner, he came into companytact with PW 1 Dattu, who was also an under trial prisoner.
The appellant persuaded PW 1 to give his daughter Nagamma in marriage to him.
Thereafter, the appellant, Smt.
When all of them went to the house of PW 1, the appellant requested the parents of the deceased, i.e., PW 1 and PW 8, to get him released from jail and they promised that they would try their best to do so.
N.SRIKRISHNA, J. This appeal arises out of a judgment of the High Court of Karnataka upholding the companyviction of the appellant on the charge of Section 302 and companyfirming the death penalty imposed on the accused appellant.
