Jayamma vs State By Ramurthinagar Police

The instant appeal, by way of special leave, is directed against judgment and order dated 13.07.2009 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in Criminal Appeal No.905 of 2006, whereby the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant under Section 302 IPC and affirmed the conviction and sentence passed by the courts below.

The brief factual matrix relating to this appeal is as follows:

On 29.02.2002, the complainant-B.Krishnappa was carrying on his work in the garden and at about 3.00 p.m., his father Pillappa came there. Rajanna's wife Jayamma was doing agricultural work in the neighbouring land and was abusing the complainant saying that his cow has eaten the paddy crops belonging to her. For that, father of the complainant said that they have put grass to their cow and the paddy crops belonging to her has not been eaten by their cow. For that, Jayamma told in case if it is left like that, the same will continue. At about 5.30 p.m., the appellant - Jayamma came with her husband, two sons and two other accused persons to the agricultural field of the complainant. The husband and sons of the appellant were holding clubs and the appellant carrying knife concealing in her waist. The husband and sons of the appellant assaulted the complainant with clubs as a result of which he sustained injuries. The husband of the appellant assaulted complainant's father and made him to fell down. Thereafter, the appellant removed the knife, which was concealed in her waist and she also stated that he should be killed. Saying so, she stabbed on the abdomen of the father of the complainant. Consequently, he fell down on the ground, who while being shifted to hospital, succumbed to the injuries. Thereafter, the complainant went to the police station and lodged a complaint. The police registered a case in Crime No.306/2002 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 307, 302 read with 149 IPC.

The trial court, vide judgment and order dated 07.04.2006, convicted the appellant under Section 302 IPC and one son (A-3) under Section 324 IPC and sentenced the appellant to rigorous imprisonment for life but released the son on probation. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed an appeal before the High Court which, as discussed above, was dismissed.

Dissatisfied with the judgment and order of the High Court, the appellant has preferred the instant appeal, by way of special leave.

Having heard Mrs.K.Sarada Devi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Mr.V.N.Raghupathy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent and perusing the materials placed before us, we are of the considered opinion that the evidence of P.Ws. 1 to 4 reveals about the overt acts attributed to the appellant who stabbed Pillappa (deceased) by means of knife. In the complaint also, it is stated that the appellant was concealing the knife in her waist. The contents of the FIR clearly disclose that the appellant uttered `Pillappa should be killed'. The evidence of P.W.1, who is the injured witness, and P.W.4, eye witness corroborates with the evidence of the doctor with regard to the injury. P.Ws.1 to 4 clearly stated in their evidence that the appellant stabbed on the abdomen of the father of the complainant - Pillappa with a knife, which was concealed in her waist. The bloodstains were found on the knife. This is revealed from the FSL Report and the Serology Report. There is corroboration with regard to the bloodstains also.

P.W.13 is the Medical Officer who conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of Pillappa. The doctor has stated that the deceased has sustained 7 injuries and the death is due to shock and bleeding as a result of stab injury on the abdomen.

Considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the instant case, we are not inclined to interfere with the concurrent findings of both the courts below.

The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Vide order dated 04.10.2013, the appellant was granted bail. The bail bonds of the appellant stand cancelled and she is directed to surrender before the trial court within four weeks from today to serve out the remaining sentence.