As per case facts, the accused, Subramanya H.T., and the deceased, Nagarathna, were husband and wife. The accused frequently harassed the deceased over an unpaid amount given to their son ... for a lorry purchase. On the night of the incident, the accused violently assaulted the deceased with an axe on her neck and back, causing fatal injuries. The trial court convicted the accused under Section 302 IPC. The accused appealed, challenging the conviction, citing unreliable and uncorroborated eyewitnesses, inconsistencies, delay in FIR, and arguing that the offense should fall under Section 304 part 2 IPC due to lack of premeditation. The question arose whether the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence was sustainable. Finally, the Court found motive, eyewitness testimonies (PW1-3 and independent witness PW7), medical evidence, and forensic reports consistent and credible. It concluded that the accused acted with clear intent to eliminate the deceased, rejecting the applicability of Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC due to premeditation and a significant time gap between quarrels. Therefore, the conviction and sentence were upheld.