LAWS(CHH)-2021-3-86

RAKESH YADAV Vs. STATE OF C.G.

Decided On March 22, 2021
RAKESH YADAV Appellant
V/S
STATE OF C.G. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 31/3/2012 passed by Sessions Judge, Raipur in Sessions Trial No.170/2011, whereby and whereunder the appellant has been held guilty for the offence under Sec. 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment with fine of Rs.1000.00, plus default stipulation.

(2.) The prosecution case is that the appellant was not happy with his wife and was doubting her character which led to frequent quarrel between them. According to the prosecution case, a day before the date of incident there was a quarrel and the deceased/wife left the house and went to live along with the sister-in-law. On the date of incident the appellant/husband came there and took the wife back to the matrimonial house. The complaint of quarrel was being made by the deceased time and again to her mother also and therefore, on that very day the mother and the sister both came to the house of the appellant. The appellant used to reside with his wife and minor child in the upper floor of the house. When the sister Kumari Manki Yadav (PW-10) went upstairs to meet her sister, she found the appellant coming out with the child and his cloths were seen stained with blood. When PW-10 entered the room she found her sister lying in pool of blood. According to the prosecution it is the appellant who killed his wife by hammering her on vital parts with a heavy piece of stone (used in the kitchen) resulting in multiple injuries, as many as 9 in number, some of which proved to be fatal.

(3.) The dead body was sent for postmortem after completion of inquest proceedings and in the postmortem the doctor found as many as 8 injuries and the opinion was that the death was due to excessive bleeding caused by multiple injuries and was opined to be homicidal in nature. Upon completion of investigation charge-sheet was filed, the appellant denied charges and therefore, he was put to trial. The prosecution case was of circumstantial evidence of there being frequent quarrel between the husband and wife, wife leaving the matrimonial house a day before the incident, she being brought back to the house by the husband on the date of incident, sister of the deceased (PW-10) and other witnesses finding dead body lying in pool of blood and the presence of the appellant with stained cloths worn by him. The motive as alleged by the prosecution was that the appellant was doubting the character of his wife - the deceased which ultimately led to murder.