Dhananjaya Reddy vs. State of Karnataka AIR 2001 SC 1512

Case Name:	Dhananjaya Reddy vs. State of Karnataka AIR 2001
Equivalent Citation:	AIR 14th March, 2001 SC 1512
Date of Judgement:	14/3/2001
Court:	Supreme Court of India
Case No:	Appeal (crl.) 1000 of 1999
Case Type:	Criminal
Petitioner:	Dhananjaya Reddy
Respondent:	State of Karnataka
Bench:	K.T. Thomas and R.P. Sethi

Dhananjaya Reddy vs. State of Karnataka AIR 2001 SC 1512

RELEVANCE- The case is related to the betrayal of connubial trust by a wife against her husband. Sexual life and extra marital affair of the wife led to finish her own husband life.

FACTS-

1. The deceased Amar Nath who was in the army service was married Ms. Vanaja on 11.3.1992 in Chittor District of Andhra Pradesh.
2. Ms. Vanaja who latter on Accused 1 prior to her marriage having illicit material relations with Dhanajaya Reddy who latter on Accused 2.
3. Both Accused 1 and Accused 2 together as teacher at Gnanodaya English School at Mandanapalli.
4. Nagaraj and Subramani later on accused 3 and accused 4 were the associates of accused 2.
5. Accused 1 had written letter to Amar Nath on his Delhi address and acknowledging the fact of their illicit relations with accused 2 and abused the deceased in filthy language.
6. To resolve the controversy the Panchayat took also place and the consensus of panchayat was that accused 1 should abandon her job and join the deceased.
7. Before started living with Amar Nath her wife also threatened with that she would be joining his company only to take revenge.
8. Accused 1 and Accused 2 were in constant contact with each other and planning together to Murder the deceased and also took help of Accused 3 and Accused 4.
9. Then A1, A2 and A3 all the three stepped to Bangalore and from the Mukunda Theatre all the three persons went towards the house of A1 wherefrom A2 fetched from A1 key of newly constructed house where they alleged to have stayed tell the commission of crime.
10. During all this period, deceased was away on his duty on a night shift which was end at 2:00 am.
11. The deceased returned from his duty at about 2.30 am. After half an hour A1 came out of her house and alerted the other accused person that her husband had gone into sleep.
12. After her intimation all the three accused persons entered the house of the deceased and committed murder in a most and heinous and barbarous manner.
13. Accused 1 handed over her gold along with Mangalsutra to Accused 2 and sat on the floor of the kitchen facilitating Accused to tie her hands and legs with the rope.
14. The jewellery was distributed by Accused 2 to Accused 4 and Accused 1 was tied down to show that the occurrence was that of murder and robbery committed by some unknown persons.
15. Then the complaint was lodged by Nanjundappa and then the investigation has started by police.

ISSUE RAISED-

Whether all the three accused come under the conviction of Section 302 along with section 34?

ARGUMENTS-

• The conviction and sentences awarded to Accused 1 to Accused 3 have been questioned on various grounds canvassed before judges by the learned counsel who appeared for them.
• It was contended that the judgement of conviction and sentence was against law and facts.
• As the case of the prosecution is based upon circumstantial evidence, it was argued that the circumstances were insufficient to connect the accused with the commission of the crime.

JUDGEMENTS-

• The court of sessions convicted Accused 1 and Accused 2 under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code and awarded them life imprisonment.
• Accused 3 and 4 were acquitted by giving them the benefit of doubt. Accused 1 and Accused 2 filed Criminal Appeal in the High Court of Karnataka by not satisfied with the conviction and sentence awarded to them.
• The State of Karnataka also file criminal appeal against the order of acquittal to Accused 3 and Accused 4.
• Both the appeals were heard together and disposed of by a common judgement. The High Court upheld the conviction and sentence awarded to Accused 1 and Accued 2 and dismissed there.
• However, the appeal filed by the state was allowed and Accused 3 and Accused 4 were held guilty of offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34.
• Indian Penal Code. As the principal accused being Accused 1 and were awarded imprisonment for life by the trial court, The High Court in its discretion sentenced Accused 3 and Accused 4 also to the life imprisonment.

CONCLUSION-

As far as Section 302 concerned it is dealing with the punishment of Murder under section 300 and Section 34 tells about common intention. So in this case all three accused was alleged to have committed murder with common intention. Section 497 deals with adultery but got unconstitutionalised after the case of Joseph Shine vs. Union of India, as this section only made the man convicted not the woman.

Name- Harshita Sharma, College-Barkatullah University, Department of Legal Studies and Research, Semester- 3^rd Year, 6^th Semester