Crl.A. No. 438 of 2005 1

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 438 OF 2005

BASAPPA @ BASAVARAJ   .....   APPELLANT

VERSUS

STATE OF KARNATAKA   .....   RESPONDENT

O R D E R

1. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The courts below have found, as a matter of fact,  

that the chain of circumstances led to the conclusion  

that the appellant who was the husband of the deceased  

was unmistakably guilty of the charges framed against  

him.  Admittedly, the extra judicial confession made by  

the accused before his father who was examined as P.W. 2  

has  not  been  believed  by  the  courts  below  as  this  

witness did not support the prosecution and was declared  

hostile.   However,  the  recovery  of  the  bones  of  the  

deceased and the jewellery i.e. the ear rings, nose pin  

and mangal sutra at the instance of the appellant and  

the fact that he had tried to side track the inquiry on  

the complaint filed by the father of the deceased after  

her disappearance, clearly connects the appellant with  

the crime.

Crl.A. No. 438 of 2005 2

3. The learned Amicus Curiae has placed reliance on  

certain  judgments  of  this  Court  to  contend  that  the  

chain  of  circumstances  had  to  be  complete  in  a  case  

relating  to  a  conviction  based  on  circumstantial  

evidence. There can be no quarrel with this proposition  

but each case has to be dealt with on its own facts and  

no universal rules on facts can be drawn or spelt out.

4. We are, therefore, of the opinion that there is no  

merit in this appeal.

5. Dismissed.

6. The fee of Amicus is fixed at ` 7,000/-.

     ........................J       [HARJIT SINGH BEDI]

     ........................J       [CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD]

NEW DELHI MARCH 01, 2011.