A conviction for attempted murder under Section 307 IPC requires clear evidence of the specific intent to cause death. Circumstantial evidence, including forensic identification, must form a complete chain to support a conviction, but cannot sustain charges for offences where the essential ingredients are not specifically proved.

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 374(2) OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION DATED 21.07.2023 AND SENTENCE DATED 24.07.2023 PASSED BY THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BAGALAKOTE IN S.C. NO. 122/2019 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 451, 376(2)(I), 307, 325 AND 380 OF I.P.C. & ETC.

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL, HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON 09.04.2026, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT THIS DAY, JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

CAV JUDGMENT

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

This appeal is filed challenging the judgment of conviction for the offences punishable under Section 451, 376 (2)(I), 307, 325 and 380 I.P.C. and the sentence imposed for the above offences and prayed this Court to set aside the judgment of conviction and sentence.

2. The factual matrix of the case of the prosecution is that on 17.05.2019 at about 3.30 p.m. in the house belonging to the complainant situated at Nandikeshwar village, the accused having observed that there is no-one in the house except the victim who is suffering from mental ill health by birth, trespassed the house and subjected the victim for sexual act and also with an intention to take away her life, an attempt is made to commit her murder by smashing her head with force on the ground and voluntarily caused hurt; so also committed theft of a mobile which was kept in the house; when family members came back to the house after attending Dyavamma Fair at 3.00 p.m. they have noticed the victim was lying unconscious in the kitchen area; the articles found in the house were also scattered, the mobile which was kept near the mirror was also missing.

3. Hence they lodged the complaint in terms of Ex.P.1. Based on the complaint case was registered in Crime No. 77/2019, the Investigating Officer investigated the matter, recorded the statement of witnesses and also with the help of the expert finger print at the spot were also recovered; and thereafter also obtained the opinion. After completion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed against the accused. During the course of investigation the accused was arrested on 19.05.2019; and he was also subjected to medical examination. The accused was produced before the trial Court wherein he did not plead guilty and claims the trial. Hence the prosecution relies upon evidence of PWs1 to 20, got marked documents Exs.P.1 to P.82 and also relies upon MOs 1 to 14.

3. The trial Judge having considered both oral and documentary evidence particularly the last seen theory; the evidence of PW4; recovery of chance prints at the place of incident; finger prints opinion, medical evidence, odontology report and comparison of the bite marks on the victim with the dentist of the accused person; relying upon evidence of the Doctors who have been examined before the trial Court; recovery at the instance of the accused, i.e. Mobile; considering the injury noted on the accused, so also considering the place of incident, comes to the conclusion that prosecution has proved the guilt against the accused for the offences punishable u/S 451, 325, 307 and 380 of IPC as well as the offence of rape thereby convicted and sentenced. Being aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, the present appeal is filed.

4. The counsel appearing for the appellant in his arguments vehemently contend that the trial Judge passed j