VIKAS BANSAL Vs. STATE NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated 24th April, 2008, whereby the accused was convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, under Section 302, IPC, and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment, with fine of ' 5,000/- on the charge of murdering his wife, Radha (hereafter "the deceased").

(2.) The prosecution case was that on 22.10.2005 PW-17, SI Rajesh Dogra received intimation (DD No.7A, PS Khajoori Khas) regarding a theft and murder at House No.10/21, Gali No.10, Dayal Pur, A Block (hereafter "the premises"). He, along with PW-15 ASI Rajender Singh, Head Constable Keshav and Constable Jeet Pal reached the premises, and found it open. On inspection of the premises, inside, he found that the household goods were scattered; in the inner room he discovered the dead body of a lady (the deceased), the accused s wife. There was a ligature mark on the deceased s neck; an orange coloured chunni was lying on the bed. He did not find any eye witness on the spot. A First Information Report (FIR) was registered through Constable Jeet Pal, under Section 302 IPC and investigation was handed over to Station House Officer, (SHO), P.S. Khajoori Khas, viz. Inspector P.S. Chahal, who reached the spot and drew the site plan, seized the exhibits viz. bed sheet, pillow and chunni, and recorded the statement of witnesses. It was learnt, during investigation that the marriage (between the appellant/accused and the deceased) was the second marriage -of the deceased, who had married the accused in 2003; she had secured divorce from her earlier husband. The deceased and the Appellant knew each other for a long time prior to their marriage. They had independent businesses; but the Appellant used to help the deceased, in her work. The prosecution alleged that the Appellant started suspecting the deceased s character. As a result, the two started quarrelling. According to the prosecution, which relied on the testimony of one Pradeep (PW-3), in the evening of the incident, (i.e. in the evening of 21.10.2005), the couple went to the deceased s rented godown and quarreled there. It was also alleged that after that, the deceased collected '13,000/- from the godown and returned home, with the Appellant. After that at about 10 PM, the Appellant left the house on his motor-cycle. The Appellant was subjected to sustained interrogation when he allegedly admitted to his guilt and was therefore arrested, and his disclosure statement was recorded. In this statement he disclosed that in order to mislead everyone, he gave the incident, the colour of loot and removed some jewelry and cash and kept it in his father s house (at Kanti Nagar). He then went to Meerut in the night. It was alleged that the Appellant s statement also led to seizure, (from his father s house) of jewelry, a mobile phone (make Nokia 1100) and cash worth '12,850/-.

(3.) In support of its case the prosecution examined 19 witnesses. PW-1 Chanderwati, the deceased s mother deposed with regard to marriage of couple in 2003. She stated that accused and the deceased quarreled with each other; and that the house at Bhajan Pura was in the name of the deceased; the accused wanted to get that house transferred to himself, to which the deceased did not agree. She was cross examined by the prosecution, as she did not state anything with regard to the accused doubting the deceased s character; she however maintained that she did not give any such statement to the police and she did not state that the Appellant suspected the deceased s character. According to her, on 22.10.2005 the appellant informed her on telephone that theft had taken place in his house and the deceased was murdered.