SAWAL DAS Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant before us by special leave, Sawal Das, his father Jamuna Prasad, and his stepmother Kalawati Devi, were charged with offences punishable under Section 302 Indian Penal Code simpliciter on the allegation that they had intentionally caused the death of Smt. Chanda Devi, the wife of the appellant, on 28-5-1965 in their house in mohalla Andi Gola in Muzaffarpur, in Bihar. The appellant Sawal Das, his father Jamuna Prasad, their motor driver Sita Ram, and either other persons were charged under Section 201 Indian Penal Code for having caused the disappearance of the body of Smt. Chanda Devi with a view to concealing the murder Furthermore, Smt. Kalawati Devi was charged under Section 302/109 Indian Penal Code for having instigated the murder of Chanda Devi. The trial Court had amended and converted the charges against the appellant and Jamuna Prasad and Kalawati Devi into those under Sections 302/34 Indian Penal Code and convicted each of them with the aid of Section 34 Indian Penal Code for the offence of murder and sentenced them to life imprisonment. It had also convicted the appellant and his father under Section 201 Indian Penal Code, but it did not pass separate sentences against them for this offence. The driver Sita Ram was also convicted under Section 201 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to three years Rigorous imprisonment. It acquitted all the other accused person. On appeal, the High Court of Patna had acquitted the appellant, his father, and his stepmother of offences punishable under Section 302/34 Indian Penal Code, but it found the appellant alone guilty of an offence punishable under S. 302 Indian Penal Code simpliciter and sentenced him of life imprisonment. It has also found the appellant and his father guilty under Section 201 Indian Penal Code. But, while passing a sentence of three years rigorous imprisonment of Jamuna Prasad, it had not passed a separate sentence on the appellant in view of his conviction under Section 302 Indian Penal Code. It had allowed appeals of Kalwati Devi and Sita Ram and acquitted them.

(2.) The whole case against the appellant depends upon circumstantial evidence. There is no eye witness of the murder which was alleged to have been committed by the appellant, his father, and step-mother conjointly on the morning of 28-5-1965 at about 8.00 a.m. The Sessions Judge had relied upon the following proved facts and circumstances to convict the three accused persons of murder under Section 302/34 Indian Penal Code:

(3.) The Trial Court had come to the conclusion that, upon the established circumstances listed above, no other inference was left open to the Court except that the appellant and his father and step-mother had conjointly committed the murder of the deceased Smt. Chanda Devi on the morning of 28-5-1965 and that the appellant and his father had then hastily and stealthily disposed of the body in order to conceal the commission of the offence. It had also taken into account, in coming to this conclusion, the fact that the appellant had unsuccessfully set up a plea, in his written statement, that Smt. Chanda Devi, who was alleged by him to be wearing a Nylon Saree said to have caught fire accidentally while she was using a Kerosene stove in her room, died of extensive burns on her body and collapsed. The appellant had alleged that Smt. Chanda Devi was debilitated and kept a bad health due to frequent pregnancies and was also suffering from Asthma, a weak heart, and abdominal complaints. She had given birth to six children.