- (1.)This appeal arises out of a judgment of the High Court of Karnataka reversing the order of acquittal made by the trial court for an offence under section 302 I. P. C. by recording conviction against the appellant and sentencing him to imprisonment for life.
(2.)The facts revealed in the case are that one Narayanaswamy, aged about 25 years, resident of Ramaganaparthy village was done to death by a sharp weapon used for cutting mulberry leaves at about 9. 00 a. m. on 2.3.1989 in the house of P. W. 4- krishnappa of Sonnehalli village and which was noticed by P. W. 2- Pillama, his wife and P. W. 3- Manjula, his daughter, who were present then at home. P. W. 2- Pillama stated that Narayanaswamy, the deceased, was known to them for four years prior to his death. On the fateful day at about 7. 00 or 8. 00 a. m. the accused took out narayanaswamy stating that they wanted to meet friends for collection of funds for construction of the temple. At that time p. W. 2 was sitting outside the house combing the hair of her daughter and her son was inside the house in kitchen having his coffee while her mother-in-law was also staying inside the house. At about 9. 00 a. m. , the deceased Narayanaswamy returned and he went inside the house. Later on, the accused, Ramamurthy, came holding a gunny bag in his left hand under the arms and went inside the house. Thereafter, she heard a sound "dubbu-Dubbu". According to the custom observed by the community, she could not enter the house as she had her menstrual periods then, but she peeped through the door and saw the accused assaulting the deceased with a "kathire" which weapon (M0. 1) is used for cutting mulberry leaves. Having seen the injury to the deceased on left portion of the head, she got frightened and ran screaming towards the A. K. colony which is about 50 to 60 feet away from her house whereupon several persons accompanied her including, one Munivenkatappa back to her house. Thereafter, P. W. 1- S. M. Narayanaswamy, came to their house and sent for her husband and all of them went to house of Ramachandrachar along with her husband and made a report to the police who arrived at the spot and took up the case for investigation. This evidence of p. W. 1 is substantially corroborated by p. W. 3- Manjula. P. W. 9- Dr. Sathyanarayana, who conducted the postmortem, stated that the deceased has received injuries as follows:
"A male of 176 cms height, shoulders breadth of 40 cms. Hair length of 5 cms and of dark complexion. There were multiple cut and stab injuries over entire half of skull, facial, mandible bones and the bones were separated from the stuff skull bones with bleeding. Brain was coming out 2 A 10 cm cut wound on the middle of chest. 3 A 10 Vs cm. Cut wound on the left arm". He also stated that to cause such injuries the weapon must be sharper than MO. 1 which is produced in the case. In answer to the court question he stated that if it was sharper than what it is now, injuries could occur.

(3.)On coming to know of the murder of narayanaswamy, PW1 - S. M. Narayanaswamy, who is the mandal pradhan of Kundalaguiriki village, visited the house of PW4 - Krishnappa when he asked PW 2 - Pillamma and her children as to occurrence in their house they answered that Ramamurthy, the accused present before the court, had killed narayanaswamy by assaulting with a chopper on his head and ran away. Thereafter, he lodged a complaint after discussing the matter with Ramachandrachar.