H.B. Prabhakara Sastry, J.

The appellant has filed this appeal challenging the judgment of the learned LXII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City, (hereinafter referred to as "Trial Court" for brevity) dated 25-10-2018 and order on sentence dated 27-10-2018, wherein he was convicted in Sessions Case No.344/2011 for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 309 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as "IPC" for short) and was sentenced accordingly.

2. The summary of the case of the prosecution is that, the accused/appellant-Sri. S.L. Rajappa and deceased Ms. Naveena were alumni of Kolar Degree Law College and were practicing as Advocates in Bengaluru. The accused and deceased had a love affair. The accused who had obsessive love towards deceased intended to marry her. The deceased who initially had agreed to marry the accused later turned down his proposal. Few months prior to the incident, the deceased was moving closely with her senior colleague, one Mr. Prakash Shetty and the accused by misunderstanding that the deceased had an affair with her senior colleague decided to finish off her. Accordingly, with premeditation on 08-07-2010 in the afternoon in between 1:45 p.m. and 1:50 p.m. in the eastern corridor of Court Hall No.4 in the first floor of the High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru (this Court), the accused with a knife stabbed the deceased on her chest and neck. Due to the said stabbing and heavy bleeding from the grievous injuries sustained by her, the deceased who was in her lawyer's robe slumped to the floor in a pool of blood and succumbed to the injuries on the spot.

3. After stabbing the deceased, the accused attempted to commit suicide by consuming poison mixed alcohol and also by stabbing himself with the same knife inflicting multiple injuries on his chest, neck and abdomen and while doing so, he ran to a nearby gents' toilet and bolted from inside. On the way to the gents' toilet, he also threatened PW-16 with knife which he was possessing. Thereafter, the Police Constables PW-1, PW-25 and PW-31 rushed to the spot and they got opened the door of the Lavatory/toilet where the accused had locked himself from inside, and they also got the knife which was in the possession of the accused to fall on the floor in the gents' toilet. They picked up the accused outside the lavatory after which the accused was shifted to Mallya Hospital for medical treatment. Subsequently, the injured/accused was also shifted to Victoria Hospital for further treatment. Initially, the criminal law was set into motion on the complaint filed by CW-17-Ms. Bharathi in the complainant Station Crime No.32/2010 for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 309 of IPC. On completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer filed charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 309 and 506(B) of IPC before the Trial Court.

4. Since, the accused pleaded not guilty, the prosecution in all examined thirty-four witnesses through PW-1 to PW-34 and got marked documents from Exs.P1 to P64(a) and produced Material Objects at MO-1 to MO-54. On behalf of accused, neither any evidence was led nor any material object was produced, but got marked documents as Ex.D1 and Ex.D2.

5. The Trial Court by its impugned judgment dated 25-10-2018 convicted the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 309 of IPC and sentenced him accordingly. It is challenging the said judgment of conviction, the appellant has preferred this appeal.

6. Lower Court Records were called for and placed before this Court.

7. Heard the argument from both side and perused the materials placed before the Court.

8. For the sake of convenience, the parties would be referred to as per their ranks before the Trial Court.

9. The learned counsel for the accused/appellant in his arguments submitted that the Investigating Officer has not investigated on the fact as to who brought the knife at MO-11 to the