CAV JUDGMENT

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

This appeal is filed by the appellant-accused praying to set aside the judgment and sentence passed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Gadag (for short, the trial Court) in S.C. No. 38/2021 for the offences punishable under Section 341, 504 and 302 of IPC.

2. The factual matrix of the prosecution case before the trial Court making the accusation in the charge sheet is that the accused proposed to marry the daughter of the elder sister of the deceased, the accused often and often insisted the deceased to accept his marriage proposal, the deceased went to the house of the accused and abused the parents of the accused. Hence the accused was having the grudge against the deceased. On 16.03.2021, in between 09.15 p.m. to 09.20 p.m., in front of the ruined house of Ramesh Negaluru near C.C. Road, Sarana Basweshwara Temple, Betageri Tea Bazaar, when the deceased came in his Hero Deo Motorcycle bearing registration number KA-26-EC-7980, the accused wrongfully restrained the deceased from proceeding further and abused in a filthy language and with an intention to commit the murder of the deceased, thrown the chilli powder on his face and eyes and stabbed the deceased on his neck and all over the body. As a result, he fell down and due to the grievous injuries, he succumbed to the injuries.

3. Based on the complaint given by PW1 and the information was given by PW4 to her and that also PW3 witnessed the incident of the assault, a complaint was lodged in terms of Ex.P1, in furtherance of the same, the police have registered the case, investigated the matter and filed a charge sheet. The prosecution in order to prove the accusation made against the accused, relied upon the evidence of PW1 to PW29 and got marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P75, got marked MOs 1 to 18. During the course of the cross-examination of PW10, the defence got marked document Ex.D1, portion of Statement recorded u/Section 161 of CrPC. On closure of the evidence of the prosecution, the accused was subjected to record statement u/S 313 CrPC wherein the denied the incriminating evidence but he did not choose to lead any defence evidence. The trial judge, having considered the material on record, particularly undisputed facts, the homicidal death, the evidence of PW1, PW3, PW4, PW10 and PW11, the documents of inquest major as per Ex.P7, the evidence of PW1 and PW2, spot mahazar witness which was shown by PW3, the injuries found on the accused which were not explained by the accused, the seizure of the cloth of the accused, chilli powder and knife, and material objects which were produced before the Court, comes to the conclusion that the accused only committed the murder of the deceased. The trial Court also took note of the FSL report of blood alcohol, the blood stains found in the weapon as well as the cloth of the accused, comes to the conclusion that accused abused the deceased in filthy language, wrongfully restrained him and inflicted the injury. All these materials points out the guilt of the accused. Hence the trial Court convicted and sentenced. Being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and sentence of the trial Court, the accused-appellant is before this Court.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant would vehemently contend that the trial Judge did not appreciate the evidence in a proper perspective and instead twisted the evidence in favour of the prosecution, which has resulted in miscarriage of justice. The counsel further contends that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused and the trial Court ought to have acquitted him. The trial Court fails to consider the material contradictions and omissions in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses and came to a wrong conclusion. The trial judge ought to have taken note of the fact that absolutely there is no evidence on record to connect this appellant accused to alleged incident. Further the motive for committing the murder