KHAITU RAM Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 8/4/2013 passed by the Sessions Judge, Ramanujganj in Sessions Trial No. 123/2011, whereby and whereunder the appellant has been held guilty for commission of offence under Sec. 302 IPC and sentenced life imprisonment and fine of Rs.500.00 with default stipulation.

(2.) The prosecution story as unfolded from the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence and the records of the case is that the appellant's wife the deceased and his parents had gone to collect forest produce which was taken to market for sold. Thereafter, it is said that the appellant, his wife, mother and his father, all four purchased the liquor and consumed the same together. The parents of the appellant left for home leaving behind the appellant and his wife. All this happened on 21/12/2012. Next day at about 4-5 PM in the evening, the appellant came to his father Nawra (PW-2) and informed him that the dead body of his wife lying near Nala, he may go and see and thereafter the appellant went away to some other place. On receipt of this shocking information, Nawra (PW-2) informed the villagers and all proceeded to the spot where the dead body of Sanjhiyaro Bai was found as disclosed by the appellant. Appellant, however, could not be found immediately and was taken into custody after two days being suspect. In the meantime, panchanama was prepared and the dead body was sent for postmortem and the postmortem was conducted by Dr. Shashikala (PW-1), who found as many as 28 injuries on the body of the deceased. Most of the injuries except two, were bruises, contusion, abrasion and scratches marks found all over the body, and liver was also found damaged, as a result of heavy blow in the abdominal part. The appellant was arrested and his memorandum was recorded and stone which was alleged to be used for killing the wife was seized from the place of incident. Upon completion of usual investigation charge sheet was filed against the appellant before the jurisdictional magistrate, who in turn, committed the case to the Sessions Court. On the basis material contained in the charge sheet, learned trial Court framed charges against the appellant alleging that the appellant murdered his own wife. The appellant having abjured guilt, was put to trial. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined as many as 13 witnesses. The accused was, thereafter, examined under Sec. 313 CrPC in respect of incriminating evidence and circumstances appearing against him in the evidence led by the prosecution, which the appellant denied and stated that he is innocent and falsely implicated. No defence witnesses was examined.

(3.) Learned trial court relying upon circumstantial evidence of last seen, discovery of the dead body at the instance of the appellant, conduct of the appellant in leaving the place, as also evidence of motive that the appellant suspected character of his wife that she was having illicit affair with third person, held the appellant guilty of commission of offence and sentenced as described above.