ORAL JUDGMENT

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

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and also the counsel appearing for the respondent/State.

2. This appeal is filed against the judgment of conviction dated 07.09.2023 passed by the III Additional District and Sessions and Special Judge, Dharwad (for short, 'the Trial Court') in S.C.No.56/2022 for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 324, 307, 302, 504 and 506 of Indian Penal Code (for short, 'IPC') and prays this Court to set aside the judgment of conviction for the above offences.

3. The factual matters of case of prosecution is that on 01.05.2021 at 09.00 p.m., the accused picked up quarrel with his father i.e., PW.1 and deceased mother with respect to transfer of property in his name and assaulted them with intention to commit murder saying that if they are murdered he will get the land in his name. Saying so he started assaulting with stick to PW.1 and when the same was noticed by the deceased, she tried to interfere. Then the accused was saying that if first she is murdered, then everything will be okay and with an intention to commit murder, assaulted the deceased to her face, head and all over the body with sticks. Due to the assault, she died thereby the accused has committed the murder.

4. It is also the case of the prosecution that he has attempted to commit murder of PW.1 with stick and he has caused the injuries to both PW.1 and deceased by assaulting with hands and stick and also abused in a filthy language and threatened PW.1 with life. Hence complaint was filed and case was registered in Crime No.63/2022 for the above offences.

5. The Investigation Officer who registered the case, investigated the matter by recording the statement of witnesses and collected all materials from the concerned and filed the charge sheet. On filing of charge sheet, the trial Judge took cognizance, secured presence of the accused and framed the charges. The accused also did not plead guilty and claims trial. Hence, prosecution mainly relies upon the evidence available PW.1 to PW.13 and got marked documents as Exs.P1 to P42 and got marked M.O.1 to M.O.7. On closure of the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, the accused was subjected to 313 statement wherein he denied the incriminating circumstances but not led any defence evidence. However, accused has given the written statement separately.

6. The trial Court having considered both oral and documentary evidence, particularly considering the evidence of PW.1, PW.5, PW.6, PW.8 and PW9 who have partly supported the case of prosecution with respect to the motive and the quarrel by the accused with PW.1 and so also considering both oral and documentary evidence of the Doctor as well as the FSL report comes to the conclusion that it is a case of homicidal death. The trial Court also relied on the evidence of PW.1, who is the injured witness, is consistent and reliable. Though PW.5 and PW.6 partly turned hostile but admission was taken from the mouth of PW.5 that accused only inflicted the injury with the club and particularly the evidence of PW.9 who also witnessed the incident at 09.00 p.m. and considered the other material before the Court. The accused though has not given any explanation in statement u/S 313 Cr.P.C. but filed written statement under Section 313(5), he has only stated that sometimes the complainant used to take intoxicated drinks and used to quarrel with the deceased and the mother was suffering from paralysis and cause of death is not within the knowledge of the accused and he has been falsely implicated in the case. But with regard to the incriminating evidence is concerned, nothing is stated in the statement filed under Section 313(5) of Cr.P.C. Hence, the trial Court comes to the conclusion that oral and documentary evidence available on record is sufficient to point out the role of the accused and convicted the accused. Being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction, the present appe