Appellant-accused feeling aggrieved by the judgment

of conviction and order of sentence passed by Additional

District and Sessions Judge, Gadag in S.C.No.32/2013,

dated 29.03.2014, preferred this appeal.

2.

Parties to the appeal are referred with their

ranks as assigned in the trial Court for the sake of

convenience.

3.

The factual matrix leading to the case of

prosecution can be stated in nutshell to the effect that on

27.12.2011 in front of Kannada School on public place

near bus-stand of Adavisomapur village at 19:30 hours,

accused picked up quarrel with complainant as the

complainant and accused were banter each other.

However, accused took the same as serious and started

abusing complainant in filthy language so as to provoke

the complainant to commit breach of public peace. On

these allegations, investigating officer has carried out

- 3 -

investigation and filed charge-sheet for the offences

punishable under Sections 323, 307 and 504 of IPC.

4.

The accused was secured before trial Court

through the process of law and trial Court after being

prima-facie satisfied framed charges against accused for

the aforesaid offences. Accused pleaded not guilty and

claimed to be tried. Prosecution in order to prove the

allegation against accused relied on the evidence of PWs.1

to 6 and documents-Exs.P.1 to P5.

5.

On closure of prosecution evidence, statement

of accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C, came to be

recorded. Accused has denied all the incriminating

material evidence appearing against him and claimed that

false case is filed. Trial Court after appreciation of

evidence has convicted the accused for the offences

punishable under Sections 323, 324 and 504 of IPC and

imposed sentence as per order of sentence.

- 4 -

6.

The said judgment of conviction and order of

sentence has been assailed by accused in the present

appeal contending that trial Court has not properly

appreciated the evidence of PWs.1, 2 and 5 and as a result

recorded improper reasoning to hold that accused is guilty

of the offences alleged against him. The trial Court has not

properly appreciated the evidence of PWs.1 and 5 with

reference to the medical evidence of doctor-PW.4 and

wound certificate-Ex.P.3. The trial Court has also not taken

into consideration material contradictions available in the

cross-examination of PWs.1, 2 and 5 so as to discredit the

case of prosecution. The trial Court has also failed to

consider that the seizure of MO.1 under panchanama at

Ex.P.2 is highly suspicious looking to the evidence of

investigating officer-PW.6 and that of pancha witness-

PW.2. The approach and appreciation of evidence on

record by trial Court is contrary to law and evidence on

record. Therefore, prayed for allowing the appeal and to

set-aside the judgment of trial Court. Consequently to

acquit the accused on the charges leveled against him.

- 5 -

7.

In response to the notice of appeal, learned

HCGP appeared for respondent-State.

8.

Heard the arguments of both sides.

9.

On careful perusal of oral evidence of material

witnesses-PWs.1, 2 and 5, it would go to show that the

incident in question took place on 27.12.2011 while the

complainant and accused along with PWs.2 and 5 were

standing infront of Kannada School on public place near

Adavisomapur village at 19:30 hours. Accused all of a

sudden became grave and started abusing complainant in

filthy language, further stabbed the complainant by means

of knife due to which complainant-PW.1 suffered injury

over his stomach.

10.

The injured-complainant during the course of

his evidence before Court has reiterated the complaint

allegations as per Ex.P.1 and deposed about the quarrel

took place between him and accused, accused by means of

knife stabbed on his stomach due to which he sustained

- 6 -

injuries. Thereafter, he was shifted to hospital and while

he was under treatment, police visited to the hospital and

he filed complaint-Ex.P.1.

11.

PW.3 is the relative of injured complainant and

PW.5 is th