IMPORTANT POINT
[The judgment establishes that consistent eyewitness testimony, corroborated by medical evidence, is sufficient to uphold a conviction for murder under Section 302 of the IPC, particularly in cases involving domestic violence and dowry-related crimes.]

JUDGMENT/ORDER

ABHAY S.WAGHWASE, J. - Appellant - accused No.1 Nandu is challenging the judgment and order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Basmath dtd. 13/4/2016 in Sessions Trial No.45 of 2012 by which he is held guilty for offence punishable under Sec. 302 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine. CASE OF PROSECUTION IN BRIEF IS AS UNDER

2. Appellant was married to deceased Vaishali in 2007. For initial period, she was treated well by her husband and in-laws. However, precisely two and half years prior to the incident in question, harassment had commenced in the backdrop of not bringing dowry of Rs.5, 000.00. Husband and in-laws were also allegedly upset for not giving proper honour during marriage. Inlaws were instigating husband to beat deceased Vaishali. Deceased used to inform her family about such treatment meted out to her.

3. On 16/5/2012, at around 3:45 a.m., while appellant was in the company of deceased, he slit her throat. She succumbed to the same and therefore, PW1 brother Sachin set law into motion vide report dtd. 16/5/2012 (Exh.44). PW17 P.I. Hake, who was entrusted with the investigation, carried out the same and charge-sheeted accused persons and they were duly tried by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Basmath, who, on appreciating the evidence adduced by prosecution and on hearing respective parties, acquitted accused Nos.2 to 5 from all charges and only appellant has been held guilty for charge under Sec. 302 of IPC and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life. The said judgment is now questioned before us by filing instant appeal on various grounds raised in the appeal memo. SUBMISSIONS On behalf of appellant :-

4. Learned counsel for appellant would submit that prosecution has miserably failed to establish the charge. It is pointed out that there is no proper appreciation of available evidence. That, implication is false and out of annoyance. That, no independent witness has been examined and rather, only family members of deceased are examined. Learned counsel pointed out that learned trial court has disbelieved the prosecution story about ill-treatment and cruelty and has already acquitted other accused, but has unfortunately held husband alone guilty. That, evidence of so called witnesses is also full of material omissions and contradictions. That, evidence shows that deceased had refused to accompany appellant to her in-laws house and therefore, appellant had alone returned. Therefore, possibility of some unknown person assaulting Vaishali cannot be ruled out. Resultantly, it is his submission that, there is no convincing and legally acceptable evidence on record, but learned trial Judge has straightway accepted the story narrated by prosecution witnesses and the answers given by them in cross are not at all taken into consideration and hence according to him, the judgment is not legally maintainable and sustainable and is liable to be set aside. On behalf of State :

5. Favouring the judgment passed by learned trial court, learned APP pointed out that there is overwhelming, clinching and credible evidence. Informant was also present in the house when the incident took place. He had upon hearing shouts and cries of his sister, entered the house and had seen her throat cut with a knife. Appellant was in her company and he had run away from there with weapon. There is recovery of incriminating material from the scene of occurrence. Evidence of none of prosecution witnesses has been rendered doubtful. There being concrete evidence regarding involvement, guilt has been fastened and as such, he prays that there is no merit in the appeal and so seeks dismissal of the appeal. EVIDENCE ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION Role, status and sum and substance of the evidence of prosecution witnesses are summarized as under :- PW1 Sachin is the informant - brother of deceased. According to him, his sister was ill-treated in the backdrop of dowry demand and for n