KANHAIYA SATNAMI Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 05/05/2007 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Dhamtari, Sessions Khand, District - Dhamtari (CG) in Sessions Trial No.24/06 whereby and whereunder, the appellant has been held guilty of commission of offence and sentenced as described below -

(2.) Rajesh (PW1), son of the appellant and deceased Seema @ Sukaro Bai gave information in the police station on 22/01/2006 which was taken in rojnamcha sanha No.894 by Panchuram Kashi (PW17). In the information, it was stated that the mother of informant namely Seema @ Sukaro Bai went missing since 01/01/2006 after she had gone to another village with his father and despite all efforts made, her whereabouts are not known. In the information, it was also stated that despite repeated query, the father was not giving clear and satisfactory answer and was evading. After taking that information, the police started enquiring about his mother. The appellant being suspect, was taken into custody and his memorandum in Ex.P/5 was recorded wherein, according to the information, the appellant disclosed that he doubted the character of his wife and having seen his wife entangled and in sexual intercourse with Gautam (PW5) at 10 AM on 02/01/2006, he caught hold of his wife and strangulated her to death and thereafter, the dead body was buried in the baadi of his house. After recording his memorandum, the higher authorities were informed and the Executive Magistrate (PW12) was deputed to conduct recovery proceedings of the dead body. Further case of the prosecution is that in presence of the witnesses, the place, where the appellant had disclosed as having buried the dead body of his wife, was excavated and the dead body was exhumed. The dead body was, later on, identified as that of Seema @ Sukaro Bai. The body was sent for post mortem and Dr. G.R.Agrawal (PW16) conducted post mortem and according to him, mode of death was Asphyxia due to strangulation stated to be homicidal in nature. The duration of death was stated to be about 15 days. Having already recorded spot identification and FIR, followed by numbered merg intimation in the police station, investigation was proceeded. The police also seized soil from the place of burial of the dead body and also one shovel and one pick axe, which according to the prosecution, was used by the accused for digging and burial of the dead body. The axe and pick axe are said to be seized from the appellant. The samples of soil as well as soil stains found in the shovel and pick axe were examined in the FSL and it was reported that the soil collected from the burial place and that found in the pick axe and shovel was one and the same. Upon usual investigation, finally charge sheet was filed.

(3.) On the basis of material contained in the charge sheet, learned Trial Court framed charges against the appellant that the appellant murdered his wife. The appellant abjured guilt and was put to trial.