The court clarified that conviction under IPC Section 307 can be established not just through harm caused but also through the intent of the accused, underlined by consistent eyewitness accounts.

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH)

Crl.A.No.104/2018 is filed by the State challenging the judgment of acquittal of the accused for the offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC and Crl.A.No.1686/2017 is filed by the accused challenging the judgment of conviction and sentence for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 326 of by the Trial Court in S.C.No.135/2016 dated 31.08.2017.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties.

3. The factual matrix of case of the prosecution is that the complainant is the brother of the victim and he is only the son to his father and his father is having 3 daughters. Among them, second daughter is Manjula who married the accused around 20 years back and having 2 children and they lived happily for sometime. Around 3 to 4 years back, accused started suspecting cruelty of the victim and picked up quarrel for silly reasons and used to abuse and assault her. On a particular date of incident, accused assaulted the victim with the razor blade and machete. The complainant came to know all these facts from her sister as well as neighbours. It is also the averment in the complaint that his sister about 2 years back came to her brother's house and was staying with him by doing tailoring work along with her 2 children. Accused was frequently visiting their house and was also picking up the quarrel with her sister.

4. That on 06.06.2016, the complainant came to know from one Nagarajaswamy that accused around 11.00 a.m., came and assaulted the victim by means of razor blade on her neck, left jaw, below left eye, right cheek and eye and caused bleeding injuries. The said incident was witnessed by the neighbours and they pacified the quarrel and accused ran away from the spot and thereafter, they shifted the injured to the government hospital at Harihara. The complainant along with his mother visited the hospital and noticed that the accused had assaulted her sister on 4 to 5 parts of the body using razor and chopper and also caused grievous injuries. As a result, she was not in a condition to speak. The accused with an intention to commit murder of Manjula i.e., PW5, assaulted her with deadly weapons.

5. Based on the complaint, case was registered for the offence punishable under Section 498A and 307 of IPC and thereafter, the police have investigated the matter and filed the charge sheet for the offence punishable under and 307 of . The accused did not plead guilty and claims trial. Hence, the prosecution examined 13 witnesses as PW1 to PW13 and got marked the documents at Ex.P1 to P17 and also marked MO1 to MO4. The accused was subjected to 313 statement and he has not laid any defence evidence. The Trial Court has appreciated both oral and documentary evidence placed on record since all the witnesses have supported the case of prosecution except PW13 and believed the version of the prosecution. However, not convicted the accused for the offence punishable under Section 307 of but invoked the offence punishable under Section 326 of . Being aggrieved by the acquittal of the accused for the offence punishable under of , Crl.A.No.104/2018 is filed by the State and challenging the conviction and sentence for the offence punishable under and 326 of , Crl.A.No.1686/2017 is filed by the appellant/accused.

6. The learned Additional SPP - Smt. Rashmi Jadhav appearing for the State would submit that the evidence of PW2 was not properly considered by the Trial Court. PW5 is the injured witness who deposed that accused came prepared with deadly weapons i.e., razor blade and chopper with an intention to commit murder and caused injuries on the vital part of neck as well as on the face. It is the contention of the counsel t