Aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed against

him, the accused in SC No.72/2017 on the file of the Principal

District and Sessions Judge, Gadag, has preferred this appeal.

2.

The accused was prosecuted in SC No.72/2017

for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 302, 504 and

506 of IPC, on the file of the Principal District and Sessions

Judge, Gadag, on the basis of the charge sheet filed by

Laxmeshwar police, in Crime No.140/2017 of their police

station. Crime No.140/2017 was registered against the

accused on the basis of the complaint as per Ex.P13 filed by

PW6-Annappa Torappa Gajakosh.

- 3 -

3.

The appellant was the sole accused in the said

case. For the purpose of convenience, the parties will be

referred to henceforth according to their ranks before the trial

Court.

4.

Gist of the complaint of PW6 is as follows:-

The accused used to lift money from the pocket of his

uncle Somanath. Therefore, himself and his uncle had

complained against the accused before the elders of the village

and they had advised him. Being enraged by that on

29.7.2017 at about 6.00 pm the accused and another person

took Somanath on the motorcycle in the guise that the elders

have convened a meeting and summoned him. The

complainant also followed them. At about 6.30 pm near the

pump house of Agasthyathirtha of Laxmeshwar, the accused

picked up quarrel with complainant and Somanath for

complaining to the elders, abused them in foul language and

crushed the head and face of Somanath with stone and

committed his murder. Further, the accused threatened PW6 of

his life, if he reveals the incident to others and he assaulted

him also.

- 4 -

5.

On the basis of such complaint, PW15 registered

FIR as per Ex.P16 and handed over the further investigation to

PW18-CPI of Shiratti police circle. PW18 conducted the

investigation and filed the charge sheet against the accused for

the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504 and 506 of

IPC. Since the accused denied the charges and claimed the

trial, trial was conducted. In support of the case of the

prosecution, PWs.1 to 18 were examined, Exs.P1 to 28 and

MOs.1 to 8 were marked. The accused after his examination

under Section 313 Cr.P.C., did not file any defence statement

or adduce the evidence.

6.

The trial Court on hearing both the parties, by

the impugned judgment and order convicted the accused for

the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 323 of IPC.

Though the trial Court did not pass a specific order of acquittal

for the offences under Sections 504 and 506 of IPC, it held that

the said charges were not proved. For the offence punishable

under Section 302 of IPC the trial Court sentenced him to life

imprisonment and fine of Rs.5,000/- and for the offence

punishable under Section 323 of IPC, simple imprisonment of

three months.

- 5 -

7.

The trial Court held that the aforesaid charges

were proved against the accused on the basis of the evidence

of eye-witness PW6 and the medical evidence of PW11-the

Doctor who conducted the postmortem examination and PW13-

the Doctor who treated PW6. The trial Court further held that

the conduct of the accused absconding from his village also

becomes relevant. Aggrieved by the said judgment and order

the accused has preferred this appeal.

Submission of Sri R.M.Javed, learned counsel for

the appellant:

8.

There

was

inordinate

delay

in

filing

the

complaint. There were material contradictions in the evidence

of PW6 and PW15 regarding the explanation for the delay. The

story of PW6 about he suffering injuries also did not inspire any

confidence as he had not suffered any external injuries and he

had not disclosed the history of assault by the accused on him

and the victim. It becomes hard to accept that PW6 leaves the

dead body to its own fate and does not inform anybody till next

day. The evidence of PWs.4 and 5-the wife and son of the

deceased show that even before PW6 allegedly filing the

- 6 -

complaint, the police were in the house o