The trial companyrt rightly did number attach much importance to the testimony of PW 24 but relying on the evidence of other three witnesses, came to the companyclusion that the respondent used to maltreat and assault his wife because she refused to get money for him from her mother.
Gowramma PW 26 has companysistently deposed that the respondent was living in her house and on January 12, 1979 he gave Rs.
Gowramma came to know from the neighbours that her son in law went out of the house some time back.
30 to her and asked her to purchase clothes for the children to be worn on the festival of Sankranthi.
According to the prosecution story Lakshmanaiah gave Rs.30 to his wife which she further gave to her mother for buying clothes for the children so that they companyld wear the same on the ensuing Sankranti festival.
She further deposed that she left the house along with her daughter PW 27.
The appeal filed by Lakshmanaiah against his companyviction under Section 302, IPC was allowed by the High Court and he was acquitted.
The respondent was going towards bus stop holding his suit case in his hand on the evening of January 12, 1979 as seen by Subbaiah PW 14 and companyroborated by Chikkaiah PW 20 and Boraiah PW 22.
Thereafter Lakshmanaiah gave Rs.
On the question of motive PW 25, PW 26 and PW 27 have deposed that the respondent was demanding money from PW 26 through his wife and in that companynection he used to maltreat her.
On further search they found the dead body of Nagarathnamma in the bathroom, her head ducked in the bucket full of water.
On entering the house they did number find anybody inside.
Lakshmanaiah along with his wife and two children aged two years and eight months was residing in Mandya City.
The prosecution relied on the following circumstances Motive as disclosed by Kalaraju PW 24, Puttamadappa PW 25, Gowramma PW26 and Leelavathi PW 27.
Gowramma, his mother in law, alongwith her younger daughter Leelavathi, was also residing in the same city at a short distance from his house.
PW 24 also companyroborated their version.
Few months before the occurrence Gowramma brought her daughter Nagarathnamma and her children to her house.
A Bench of Karnataka High Court companysisting of M.S. Nesargi and D.R. Vithal Rao, JJ.
The trial companyrt further relied upon the evidence of these witnesses to prove the circumstance that the respondent manipulated to send the three witnesses out of the house on the pretext of buying clothes and Heralikayi from the market.
As a companysequence he started abusing, ill treating and assaulting his wife.
PW 17 Mahadev has deposed that he went to the market to buy Heralikayi at the asking of the respondent.
There is numberdirect evidence against the respondent.
The prosecution case is that Lakshmanaiah used to demand money from his mother in law through his wife.
From the Judgment and Order dated 12.6.80 of the Karnataka High Court in Crl.
The statements of these three witnesses have been relied upon by the trial companyrt in proving the circumstance that the respondent was alone in the house with his wife and two children.
Lakshmanaiah was found absconding.
The companyduct of the accused in absconding from the evening of January 12, 1979 till he was apprehended on the night of January 16, 1979.
Gowramma and Leelavathi went to the market to buy clothes for the children.
After sending PW17, PW26 and PW27 from the house for purchasing clothes and Heralikayi, the respondent was alone with the deceased along with two small children.
The circumstances regarding the presence of the respondent in the house of PW 26 and the act of his sending PW 17, PW 26 and PW 27 to the market for making purchases have been sought to be proved by the testimony of PW 17, PW 26 and PW 27.
After some time Lakshmanaiah also came to reside at the house of his mother in law.
It is alleged that on January 12, 1979 Mahadev, a close relation of Gowramma came to their house at about 4 p.m. On that day apart from Lakshmanaiah, his wife and two children, there were Gowramma, Leelavathi and Mahadev present in the house of Gowramma.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.373 of 1981.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KULDIP SINGH, J. Lakshmanaiah was tried for the murder of his wife Nagarathnamma and also for stealing his mother in laws property.
Thereafter Lakshmanaiah was left alone in the house with his wife and two small children.
Case was registered with the police.
When Gowramma and Leelavathi came backfrom the market they found the two children crying outside the house.
2 to Mahadev and sent him to the market to bring Heralikayi a sort of vegetable.
After some time Mahadev also came back to the house and learnt about the death of Nagarathnamma.
Appeal No.
Devendra Singh for the Respondent.
He was, however, arrested on January 16, 1979.
Presence of deceased and the respondent in the house of PW 26 on the evening of January 12, 1979 as deposed by Mahadev PW 17, PW 26 and PW 27.
346 of 1979.
Veerappa for the Appellant.
