ABRAHAM @ ABRAHAM NAIDU Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned State Public Prosecutor.

(2.) The facts of the case are as follows: It is alleged that on 26.4.2009 at about 7.30 p.m., when PW3 - Jerald Naidu was at home in Mariavilla at Sighehalli Village, the appellant herein had barged into the house and had assaulted him with the blunt edge of a chopper with an intention to murder him and had kicked him in the abdomen, when PW3 bent over, he was assaulted on various parts of his body. He had thus suffered serious injuries. It is further alleged that the appellant, on the impression that he had killed PW3, had run away from there. As he was the leaving house, he was seen by the complainant who was returning from the church. It is in this background that it is stated that PW3 was admitted to hospital. He was said to be in Intensive Care Unit for 2 days and was an in-patient for 4 days. It is 4 days after the incident that a complaint is said to have been lodged and the further proceedings have been taken. Pursuant to the same, the petitioner was charge sheeted for the offence punishable under Section 307 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as "IPC", for brevity) and after further proceedings, the charges were framed against the accused and he had pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution had examined 6 witnesses as PW1 to PW6 and got marked 7 documents apart from a material object and thereafter, statements of the accused having been recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "Cr.P.C" for brevity), both the sides were heard and the court below framed the following point for consideration:

(3.) The learned counsel for the appellant, Smt.Budrunnisa, contends as follows: