THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 374 (2) OF CR.P.C., (UNDER SECTION 415(2) OF BNSS) PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN S.C. NO.01/2019 DISPOSED BY THE PRL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, UTTARA KANNADA, KARWAR ON 14.03.2023, AND SET-SIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION DATED 14.03.2023 AND SENTENCE DATED 21.03.2023, IN S.C. NO.1/2019 PASSED BY THE PRL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, UTTARA KANNADA KARWAR FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 324, 302, 307, 504 AND 506 OF IPC AND APPELLANT MAY BE ACQUITTED IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. MURALIDHARA PAI

ORAL JUDGMENT

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

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/accused and the learned Addl. SPP for the respondent/State.

2. This appeal is filed against the judgment of conviction dated 14.03.2023 and order of sentence dated 21.03.2023 passed in SC No.1/2019 by the learned Prl. District and Sessions Judge, Uttara Kannada, Karwar against the appellant/accused for the offences punishable under Sections 324, 302, 307, 504 and 506 of IPC and prays this Court to acquit the accused for the aforesaid offences.

3. The factual matrix of the case is that on 20.08.2018 at about 15.30 hours, in the afternoon, the accused called the deceased to drink the tender coconut and when he went near the house, he gave tender coconut to the deceased and immediately, the accused inflicted injuries on the face, head and backside of the deceased with Machete. When the wife of the deceased tried to save her husband, the accused inflicted injury on the wife of the deceased also, as a result, the injured husband of PW2 and PW2-wife, who sustained injuries, both of them were shifted to the hospital and injured PW2 took treatment in the hospital and the husband of PW2-injured succumbed to the injuries and this incident was also witnessed by PW1, son of the deceased. Based on the complaint in terms of Ex.P1, a case was registered against the accused and collected all the materials including recorded the statement of the witnesses and after conclusion of the investigation, the police filed charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 324, 307 and 302 of IPC. The accused is in the custody from the date of his arrest and he was secured before the trial Court. The charges are framed and the accused did not plead guilty and claims trial.

4. The prosecution in order to prove the charges against the accused, examined PW1 to PW17 and also got marked Exs.P1 to P40A and also relied upon MO1 to MO11. On closure of the evidence of the prosecution, the accused was subjected to 313 statement and he denied the incriminating materials of the prosecution, however, he did not choose to lead any defence evidence. The trial Judge having considered both oral and documentary evidence of PW1-eye witness, PW2-injured eye witness, PW3, who rushed to the spot having heard the screaming sound and who found the accused at the spot and he left the spot showing weapon causing a threat to the persons, who were present at the spot that he is going to teach a lesson to them. The trial Judge also considered the evidence of IO, who recovered the machete and also the clothes of the accused, which were blood stained and also believed the evidence of PW5- panch witness for recovery and also considered the FSL report, which is marked before the trial Court and having considering all these materials, comes to a conclusion that the accused only committed the murder of the deceased. Being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction, the present appeal is filed by the appellant/accused.

5. The counsel for the accused/appellant during the course of argument, would vehemently contend that the judgment of the trial Court is manifestly perverse and which is entirely opposed to the facts and circumstances of the case.