The conviction for murder under Sec. 302 IPC can be sustained based on the testimony of a sole eyewitness, provided the evidence is credible and corroborated, and the intent to kill is established through the nature of the assault.

JUDGMENT

RAJESH RAI K., J.

The appellant has filed this appeal against the judgment dtd. 8/3/2018 passed by the learned II Addl. District & Sessions Judge at Raichur in S.C.No.51/2016, wherein the learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellant for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 of IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment throughout life and pay fine of Rs.20, 000.00 and in default to pay the fine, same to be recovered as arrears of land revenue.

2. The brief facts which led to the trial of the appellant are as follows: The complainant in this case Bibi Fatima married deceased Nabi Rasool about 12 years prior to the date of incident and having four children. Deceased Nabi Rasool was addicted to alcohol and about two months prior to the incident, he started to raise quarrel with the complainant (examined as PW1) every night in drunken mood. The accused/appellant being younger brother of the complainant, used to advice the deceased not to rise quarrel. Eight days prior to the incident, the deceased abused the complainant stating that the complainant and her mother are belonging to the family of prostitutes. Accused/appellant again advised the deceased and threatened him stating that he would murder him if he continued such acts of quarrel with the complainant. However, the complainant has responded telling him that it is quite common in all the families. On 31/1/2016 at about 6.00 p.m., the complainant and her children were in Janata house of PW2 situated at village Kadadaral, Tq: Lingasugur. Accused was cutting the branches of a tree standing in front of the house of the complainant. The deceased came home and as usual raised quarrel with the complainant and started to beat her. Hearing the quarrel accused came there stating that he would kill the deceased since he repeated such acts with the complainant. Thereby, all of a sudden the accused assaulted deceased Nabi Rasool i.e. the husband of complainant PW1 with an axe over his head, neck and chin and committed his murdered.

3. PW1, wife of the deceased and sister of the accused lodged the complaint on the same day at about 7.00 p.m. as per Ex.P1 before PW12 and the same was registered in Crime No.20/2016 dtd. 31/1/2016 as per Ex.P16. Thereafter, PW12-the Investigation officer conducted the spot mahazar, inquest mahazar and after recording statements of the witnesses and obtaining necessary documents, he laid the charge sheet against the accused for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 IPC before the committal court. After committal of the case before the Sessions Court, the learned Sessions Judge having found prima-facie case against the accused, framed charge under Sec. 302 IPC. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried.

4. In order to bring home the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined as many as 12 witnesses as PW1 to PW12 so also 19 documents marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P19 and 7 material objects i.e. MO.1 to MO.7. After conclusion of the prosecution evidence, the incriminating portion of the evidence of the material witnesses was read over to the accused as contemplated under Sec. 313 of Cr.PC, however, the accused denied his involvement in the crime. He pleaded that a false case has been lodged against him and he claimed to be innocent. However, no witness in defence has been examined by the accused.

5. The learned Sessions Judge after considering the entire evidence on record, recorded conviction and imposed sentence as aforesaid upon the accused. The said judgment is challenged under this appeal.

6. We have heard the learned counsel Sri. Shivashankar H.Manur for the appellant/accused and Sri. Siddaling P.Patil, learned Addl. SPP for respondent-State.

7. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the accused, challenged the judgment of the trial Court interalia contending that the prosecution has miserably failed to bring home the guilt of the accused by leading cogent and reliable evidence. The learned Sessions Judge held the