JUDGMENT

B.Veerappa, J. - Hearing was conducted through video conference and the learned Counsel for the parties agree that the audio and video are proper.

2. The accused, who is in judicial custody for more than 7 years 2 months has filed the present criminal appeal under the provisions of Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C')against the impugned judgment and order of conviction dated 10.12.2014 made in S.C.No.61/2013 by the Principal Sessions Judge, Chikamagalur convicting the appellant-accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE (for short, hereinafter referred to as 'IPC') and sentencing him to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.30,000/- in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years.

I - The factual matrix of the case

3. It is the case of the prosecution that the appellant was working as Computer Instructor in Keonics Yuva.Com at Chikmagalur. When the deceased - Nayana joined for computer training in the said institution, at that time, the present accused was her Computer Instructor. It is alleged that both the appellant-accused and the deceased Nayana fell in love and later the deceased came to know that the accused had already been married to one Pavithra - P.W.8 and therefore, she started avoiding the accused, but the accused was insisting the deceased to love and marry him. Since she was not agreeing, it is alleged that on 31.12.2011 at about 2.30 p.m., when P.W.1 and her son - P.W.16 were there in their house as P.W.16 had come for lunch, at that time, C.W.5-P.W.8 - the wife of the accused called P.W.1 from her mobile Number 8277373085 and informed P.W.1 that accused had quarreled with her and has gone saying that he is going to kill the deceased and asked her to save the deceased Nayana. Immediately, P.W.1 and P.W.16 went to the Zilla Panchayath Office in an auto at about 2.45 p.m. and saw her daughter - the deceased Nayana was sitting on the chair of computer table in the Akshara Dashoha Office and she was murdered by piercing her throat with a sharp edged weapon. Therefore, P.W.1- Hoovamma lodged a complaint written by C.W.26- P.W.17 to the jurisdictional police, who registered a criminal case in Crime No.323/2011 against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC.

4. The jurisdictional investigating officer after investigating the matter filed the final report against the accused, who pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5. While recording the statement under the provisions of Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the accused denied the case of the prosecution in toto and contended that one Udupi Ramachandra, has committed the said murder. In order to bring home the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 37 and got marked the documents Exs.P.1 to 36(a) and material objects M.Os1 to 24.

6. The learned Sessions Judge considering the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 3, 5 to 8, 10 to 13, 23, 24, 26, 27, 32, 34 to 37 and Exs.P.1 to 16, 18 to 33 and material objects - M.Os. 1 to 24 has recorded a finding that the prosecution has proved that on 31.12.2011 in between 2.15 p.m. and 2.45 p.m. in the office of Akshara Dasoha at Taluk Panchayath, Belur road, Chikmagalur, the accused murdered Kumari Nayana by piercing her throat with a sharp edged weapon and thereby committed the offence punishable under the provision of Section 302 of IPC. Accordingly, by the impugned judgment and order of conviction, convicted the accused punishable for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC., and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.30,000/- in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years. Hence, the accused has filed the present appeal.

7. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties to the lis.

II - Arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for the appellant-accused

8.