JAI PRAKASH Vs. STATE DELHI ADMINISTRATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant, the sole accused in this case, has been convicted under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentenced to imprisonment for life by the High Court of Delhi for causing the murder of one Champat Rai, the deceased in the case.

(2.) The prosecution case mainly rests on the evidence of P.W. 2, the sole eye-witness. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the uncorroborated testimony of P.W. 2 is not : wholly reliable and therefore the conviction cannot be sustained. However, we may at this stage point out that the main submission has been that even if the prosecution case is to be accepted, an offence of murder is not made out as the accused was entitled to the right of private defence. Even otherwise, according to the learned counsel, having regard to the fact that as the appellant is alleged to have inflicted only a single injury which proved fatal, the offence committed would be one amounting to culpable homicide. To appreciate these submissions in a proper perspective, we think it necessary to state the facts of the case.

(3.) The deceased was married to Agya Devi examined as P.W. 3, He lived with his wife in a house in East Azad Nagar, Shahdra, Delhi. In the adjoining house were living his mother, P.W. 1 and his two brothers P.Ws. 2 and 5. The appellant was married to a cousin of Agya Devi, P.W. 3 and he used to visit the house of the deceased ostensibly as a relative. The deceased, P.Ws. 1, 2 and 5 objected to the appellants visits as they suspected illicit relations between the appellant and Agya Devi, P.W. 3, wife of the deceased. On August 18, 1973 at about 11 P.M. when the deceased was not in the house, the appellant came to visit Agya Devi. A few minutes later the deceased also came home and he objected to the presence of the appellant. On this there was an altercation and exchange of hot words. Then the appellant took out a Kirpan (Churra) from his waist and stabbed the deceased in the chest. The deceased fell down crying that the appellant has killed him. The appellant with the weapon ran out of the house. The incident was witnessed by P.W. 2 from the roof where he had retired for sleeping during the night. P.W. 2 and his another brother P.W. 5 chased the appellant but as the appellant who was armed with a leathal weapon threatened them and made good his escape. On return they found the deceased dead. P.W. 3 was sitting next to the body and was crying. The information was sent to the Police and P.W. 18, the Sub-Inspector, Kotwali Police Station came to the scene of occurrence and recorded the statement of P.W. 2 on the basis of which the case was registered against the appellant. He seized certain incriminating articles, held the inquest and sent the dead body for post-mortem. He also recorded the statements of the material witnesses. One of the recoveries made by him consisted of a sheath of the kirpan. The Doctor, P.W. 17, examined the dead body and conducted the post-mortem. He found one incised stab wound on the left side of the chest which proved fatal. The particulars of the injury are :-