JANAK SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal, by special leave, is directed against the order of conviction and sentence of death passed against the appellant by the Sessions Judge, Fatehpur under S. 302 of the Penal Code and confirmed by the High Court, Allahabad. The relevant facts leading to the trial of the appellant on the said charge of murder are as follows:

(2.) One Chandra Bhushan, a resident of village Muraon, District Fatehpur died several years ago leaving behind him his widow, the deceased Phoolmati, four daughters, all of whom were married during his life time and about 125 bighas of land under his cultivation. The appellant was married to one of the said four daughters, Mst. Dhanpat some twenty years before the incident in question. The youngest of these daughters, wit. Lakshmipati lost her husband within five or six months of her marriage, and then started living with her mother, the deceased Phoolmati. With a view to provide for her daughter; Mst. Phoolmati transferred seventy bighas of the said lands in the name of wit. Lakshmipati. That was about sixteen or seventeen years before the incident. Some two or three years before the incident consolidation proceedings commenced in Muraon. That furnished an excuse to the appellant to come over to Muraon for looking after the interests of Mst. Phoolmati. The appellant thereafter began to manage the lands of Mst. Phoolmati. Having gained her confidence after sometime, he got entered in the revenue records the name of his son, Raj Narain as a cotenant of Mst. Phoolmati. Raj Narain, however, died within a short time thereafter and the appellant wanted in his stead his own name to be entered in the said revenue records. This was objected to by Mst. Phoolmati. Litigation ensued over this dispute between Mst. Phoolmati and the appellant before the Consolidation authorities and the relations between the two became strained. The appellant ceased living with Mst. Phoolmati and shifted to a room in an adjacent temple built by Mst. Phoolmati.

(3.) According to the prosecution evidence, the appellant was anxious to marry wit. Lakshmipati. The deceased opposed his proposal and got Lakshmipati married to one Sukhraj. The evidence of wit. Lakshmipati was that at about 8 a.m. on the day in question, that is, August 2, 1969, the appellant came to Mst. Phoolmati and demanded a share in the said lands from her. On her refusal the appellant got enraged and left her threatening that he would not allow her lands being ploughed.