B.A. PATIL, J.

1. Accused by challenging the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chickaballapura, in SC.No.117/2013, dated 5.2.2015 is before this Court in this appeal.

2. Facts leading to the case are that prior to the alleged incident, accused-appellant tried to outrage the modesty of the daughter of the brother of the deceased. Deceased and other persons went and advised the accused to keep good behaviour. On the very night when the deceased was sleeping, accused came and assaulted with a stone and caused grievous injuries to the deceased. A complaint was registered against the accused in this behalf. With an earlier ill-will accused hatched a plan to commit the murder of Chikkagangappa and by seeing him, on 21.4.2013 at about 6.30 a.m., when the deceased Chikkagangappa had been to the land of K.T. Aswathreddy to attend the second call of nature, at that time, he came and assaulted Chikkagangappa with an axe and caused the grievous injuries on the head and other parts of the body of Chikkagangappa. As a result of the same, Chikkagangappa fell down and breathed his last. It is further case of the prosecution that the said fact was informed to the son of the deceased Srinivas who was residing in Bangalore. He immediately came from Bangalore and by seeing the alleged incident, he went to Police Station and filed a complaint as per Ex.P1. On the basis of the said complaint, a case came to be registered against the accused in Crime No.72/2013 for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. After completion of investigation, the Investigating Agency filed the charge sheet against the accused. The committal Court took cognizance and as the case was triable by the Sessions Court, it was committed to the Sessions Court. After committal, the Sessions Court took cognizance and by securing the presence of the accused and after hearing the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the accused, charge was prepared, which was read over and explained to the accused. Accused pleaded not guilty and as such the trial was fixed.

3. In order to prove its case, the prosecution got examined 10 witnesses as PWs.1 to 10 and got marked 23 documents as per Exs.P1 to P23 along with 9 Material Objects. After closure of the prosecution evidence, the statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. by putting incriminating material against him which he denied. Accused has neither led any evidence nor got any documents marked. After hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the trial Court passed the judgment and order of conviction and sentence where under accused has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for further period of one year. Accused has also been directed to pay an amount of Rs. 25,000/- to the legal heirs of the deceased as compensation. Against the said judgment and order of conviction and sentence, the accused is before this Court.

4. We have heard the learned counsel Sri Nagaraja Reddy for the appellant and the learned Additional SPP Sri Vijayakumar Majage for the respondent-State.

5. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant-accused that the trial Court has failed to appreciate the evidence on record. He submitted that there is no motive to the alleged incident. He further submitted that the accused was not there in the village as on the date of the incident. When the presence of the accused itself is doubtful, then under such circumstances, the judgment and order of conviction and sentence is not sustainable in law. He further submitted that no independent witnesses have been examined by the prosecution and contradictions and improvements in the case have not been properly appreciated by the trial Court. He further submitted that the trial Court under th