ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL)

This appeal is by the appellant/accused being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 29.06.2018, passed in Session Case No.10024/2017 on the file of IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Doddaballapura, (hereinafter referred to as the 'trial court' for short), by which, the trial Court has convicted the appellant/accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and has sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment with fine amount of ₹ 10,000/- and in default to pay the fine amount to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year.

2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that;

(a) Accused/appellant- Narasimhaiah is the father of victim-Manjunath and both were addicted to alcohol. Manjunath was pestering the appellant for money for purpose of meeting his alcoholic addiction which was the reason for frequent quarrels between them. At times victim-Manjunath had even assaulted his father, the accused in this regard. That on 12.05.2017 there was a programme of Nallathangi kathe in the house of one Rajanna s/o Chikkaerappa. Appellant/accused and his son victim-Manjunath and other neighbours had attended the said programme. Appellant /accused and the victim-Manjunath had quarrelled even in the said programme. Accordingly, neighbours had brought appellant/accused and victim -Manjunath to their house early in the morning.

(b) That the complainant one of the neighbours of the appellant/accused and victim-Manjunath who had also attended the said programme, had returned to his home at about 03.00 a.m. That on 13.05.2017 at about 05.30 a.m. when the complainant came out of his house, found gathering of villagers in front of house of appellant/accused and victim-Manjunath. When he went to the spot, he saw the dead body of victim- Manjunath lying on the cot with bleeding head injuries. That when he asked appellant/accused, he had admitted to his guilt of committing the murder of his own son for not being able to tolerate his behaviour. Accordingly, the complaint was filed before the police.

(c) Thereupon, a case was registered in Crime No.95/2017 against the appellant/accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. After the investigation, police filed the charge sheet against the appellant/ accused. Since the appellant/accused pleaded not guilty, the prosecution led its evidence examining 17 witnesses as PW1 to PW17. It marked 24 documents as Ex.P1 to P24 and 6 material objects as MO1 to MO6. Statement of the appellant/accused was recorded under Section 313 of Cr.PC. The appellant/ accused denied all the incriminating evidence against him and has not led any evidence. The trial Court on appreciating the material evidence produced by the prosecution convicted and sentenced the appellant/accused as noted above. Being aggrieved by the same, the appellant/accused is before this court.

3. Heard both side.

4. Sri. P.D.Subrahmanya, learned counsel appearing for the appellant/ accused submitted that;

(a) The prosecution has not established the ingredients of the alleged offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC beyond reasonable doubt. That there are no eyewitnesses to the incident and the entire case is based on circumstantial evidence.

(b) That admittedly appellant/accused is the father of victim- Manjunath and there was no motive of any nature whatsoever for him to commit the offence.

(c) That though the prosecution has cited PW2 and PW3 to be the eyewitnesses they cannot be considered to be so as they have not witnessed appellant/accused assaulting or causing injuries resulting in death of the victim- Manjunath.

(d) Alternatively he submits even assuming appellant/ accused had indeed caused injuries to victim-Manjunath, the same would fall within the Exceptions provided under Section 300 of IPC. Consequently, appellant/accused is entitled for the benefit under second part of Section 304 of Indian Penal Code.

(e) That the trial court has failed to take the overa