High Court Karnataka High Court

State By Inspector Of Police And … vs Gajendra S/O Jayaram on 25 March, 2008

Karnataka High Court
State By Inspector Of Police And … vs Gajendra S/O Jayaram on 25 March, 2008
Author: V.G.Sabhahit & B.V.Nagarathna


mental cmclty Md 3114:. decided that she:

acaeused and came. to the house of per pamhts; was’ .

Corning to the said house and wasfgasking:’hé-Lr. :’b__a¢:=3,;

the mmtal home, she mfizmi

the accust;-:1. Accused was 1’1-«’.’!¢I1:vfgf.]IlI’l3«’.’i.1flE’.I1f3iZ’1
her to take her fife :=«c.c11:3ed
came to tht: house of her. abusing her as
to why $11: 15:’ he would kill her
and $001; Vand stabbed her on her
chcs»t, fi2i1–1VTc;: to hcr 11230110. he was
mm st;;{%\!bc{lVby* PW.12 infoxmation that

Pwgz had a;1,:njtted’t}3 that: hospital. with s-tat.» injmics and

V’ . 11€si§§”t:1»1tV.to’~- the fidépitéal mad moorded thc statement gvetn by

and returned to the. Police. Station and

same. in Crime. No.i2,65/96 for the ofience

1::I.1×11′:3:.’;,”‘.=tAi3lo.-. under Section 307 {P0, pmparafl FIR as per

A ‘ . ‘ E:;t§’P_1O and send that Satan to the 013111″! and send the copy of

FIR to the supcriozr otficcns. He visited the spot and

conducted pa.t1u;rt aftctr con9gigIcfing_*’the* -éffinfciztignsgtédf .

the teamed Public. T fizoztmfsézl ‘

appearing for the: acctlfi :.z:i1x;”1.__

and dmumcntm evidence ‘by held
that the pmsesutieanv the; Q11: of the
acmxsend of havtigjig fizmjshabk under
Sfictions aoqttitted
the Being aggrieved by
the State: has pmfizrred this

= -3,_ \ie’énh:i§*t the lcarncxj HCGP,. appearing for

. t ” the caounsel appearing for the

4__; mgaztl to the contcntionfs urged. the paints

that for our determination in this appeal arm-

1, Whether the judgeztmcznt of acqttittal

passed by the trial Court cafls for

interference in this appeal?

2, What evict?

\,a,a

and we answctr thc above poiznts for cietcrznjnation as f.fi}i:3§ws:-

Point No, 1: In the

Point No.2: As per the ting} elder for_fheV_A4f¢s]_1¢§%é§;1g : Z V’ ” b

5. The: Icaxnozrd HCGPV hast’ Ahffikcn 3.15:

dcptnitions of PW31 to fist: of the
documents got abgr that
the cviticuoc 0f P’Ws.3, avcsctzscd has
committed and the trial court
has not on

Cflllllsfii appealing for
the “:3;’1ib111ittc::I that the judgment of

acuqgzittal i$4″j1_§v:s£;i2fi§;4x:l,.”tha”:§’.. complainant in the 110113: of

f0r’VfbV”1rr”f .VdaY3 and th¢*I1=”1fi’.. -4. _-21′ shirt was staying in

parents and she is not stihjccrtcd to any cruel

:3 faisc complaint has barn firisteujl against the

.*3cx=uss.:fi§i~ The learned counsel furthc.r submitted that

jflxigmtnt of actqtlittm passed by the trial court is justifiesd and

not call fer ilztcrfimmcc in this appeal,

KJU’

I6

and her parents and accused submitted that

the matter, Having mgmxtt to t}:1e,»AA;,z})r;rv::

it is clear that the jttdmcnit’ of::fl,ifi

trial court is justifitescl and done: ‘zr__1f3t fizz” *

apmm, Accmlingty, we Nu fin”

dcterminatirzn and M H

The appP.a1_ is VA of acquittal
passed by Bzmga1c:n=_-. City in

SC.No.728

Sd[“‘f
5’.,.£_=£d9E

Sd/:3
Judéé