N S Nagendra vs State Of Karnataka on 12 January, 2010

Karnataka High Court
N S Nagendra vs State Of Karnataka on 12 January, 2010
Author: K.Sreedhar Rao B.Adi

The material facts of the prosecution case disclosed that,
one Madhusudhan (deceased) is a boy aged about 12 years
studying in Adichunchangiri Boarding School at Belliir. One

Smt.Sujatha — PW6 is the mother of the deceased. Thiexdselceased

is deserted by a husband PW9 about seven years’

incident. The deceased is the child born-to ‘ .

with ewe. The accused developed iel:meey»i'[iiii-ad

live–in relationship with hers ‘fiLi}.fi accused the’

deceased was found to be impedim;en_t”for his”1<elatl(:€I1ship with
PW6. Therefore, he Went "to school, took the
deceased with him Vfromi'l'Belliirl tojufiotel Srirangapatna on

16.9.20f}3. -He l rlooi:rr–~.i11 -the lodge giving his name as

K.Raju, resid_encel'of Bangalore, signed the hotel

register in. the said name. The deceased and accused lived in

roor;_1li%'o:1A2..4Et–..vis stated that, accused administered a poison

who after consuming the food died. The

is _ accus~ed.Wentl"'out of the hotel around 10.30 p.m. On the next

is Vlpdayyimorning at 7.30 a.m. PW1 found through window the child

the floor. PW} lodged the complaint. The police break

is * open the door and found the child lying dead.

2. The post mortem report disclosed that, the death is on

account of respiratory failure on account of consumption of zinc


phosphate «~ poison. The death is homicidal. The accused is
arrested on 5.11.2003. The accused is identified by PW} in the
Test Identification Parade conducted by PW13. The statements
of the schooi children PW3 and PW-4 is recorded. It shogwsggthat,

accused had come and took the deceased with

on the date of the incident. The accused__”

committing the offence under Section.stA3(§2,’ _g

3. PW1 supports the prosccutioncase anci.vhas’ deposed u

the effect that, accused on around’ came
with the deceased and toolérooml 1\io.i’1.2.V,.s’igned hotel register
stating his name as ofiRaj’ai_inagar, Bangalore.

heotei’fregisterfcoritaining the handwriting of the

accused andéainote’boo1:»–co’ntaining the admitted handwriting of

accusedtvwere seizedand sent to handwriting expert. The report

tha_t,.:4A’admitted handwriting in the note book, the

fiaindjxrriting in the hotel register are of the same

V — Derson. v–i5W’1:”‘ has also identified the accused in the Test

.Vident_ification Parade conducted by PW13. The schooi children

and PW4 testified to the fact that, on 16.9.2003 around

it p.II1. the accused had come and took the deceased with

” him. They have identified the accused in the Court. The accused

in the examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C. does not deny the

seizure of notebook — EX.P21 and his admitted signatures. The


*AP/ ”


evidence of PW1 disciose that, accused and deceased iived

together at room No.12 and they were last seen together.g’–.._p

5. The prosecution report discloses that,is_

homicidal. PW6 admits her relationship with a_cc-u.sed.v aboVe..

evidence clinchingly establish the guilt of
of conviction recorded is soundand

Appeal dismissed.


 iiii      JUDGE

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information