TILAK RAJ ALIAS BANNAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Tilak Raj impugns judgement dated 05.09.2011 whereby he has been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) for murdering his wife Rameshwari by stabbing her. By the same judgment the appellant has been convicted under Section 309 IPC for attempted suicide by consuming poisonous chemicals. By the order of sentence dated 07.09.2011, the appellant has been sentenced to life imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 IPC and a fine of Rs.10,000/- has been imposed. No separate sentence has been imposed for the offence punishable under Section 309 IPC. However, separate directions under Section 357A Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) have been passed.

(2.) At the outset, we may notice that in the Trial Court judgment it has been, inter alia, held that Vikram Singh (PW-2) and Laxmi (PW-8), deceased's brother-in-law and sister, were not eye witnesses to the occurrence. They were not present at the crime spot and had not seen the stab wounds being inflicted on the deceased. To this extent we agree with the reasoning of the Trial Court. However, it has come on record in Vikram Singh's statement (PW-2) that the accused's house was at a distance of around 100 steps from his house. Similarly, PW-8's house was located within 5 minutes walking distance from the matrimonial house of the deceased. Therefore, it cannot be denied that the said witnesses would have naturally rushed to the crime spot, immediately upon getting the information. PW-2 has deposed that on 25.09.2006 he received a telephone call from Raj Rani (PW-1), his mother-in-law, and had immediately left for the house where the deceased was residing with Tilak Raj, the appellant. Thereafter he went to Raj Rani's house, at Sita Ram Bazar, Ajmeri Gate, to inform her but learnt that she already left for the hospital. Laxmi (PW-8) has deposed that on 25.09.2006 her mother informed her over the telephone that the appellant Tilak Raj had mauled the deceased. On the said date, PW-8 visited deceased's matrimonial home where she learnt that deceased had died.

(3.) Raj Rani (PW-1) in her deposition has stated that, the deceased Rameshwari married Tilak Raj, the appellant, about five years before the date of occurrence. In the initial years on several occasions when her daughter visited the parental house she had complained regarding the ill treatment, including physical violence and torture, she suffered in her matrimonial home. For the last two years the appellant had even forbidden the deceased from visiting her parental house. Somehow, on 21.09.2006, Rameshwari came to PW-1 and apprised her that the appellant was beating her frequently. PW-1 and her deceased daughter decided to go to the Police Station- Nabi Karim and they lodged the complaint (Ex.PW1/A) against the appellant. The appellant Tilak Raj was called to the Police Station and compromise was recorded (marked Ex.PW1/B). Pursuant to the compromise the deceased went back to reside with the appellant. Then on 25.09.2006, at about 8.00 P.M., two police officials came to PW-1's residence and apprised that her daughter had sustained injuries and was admitted to Lady Hardinge Hospital. When PW-1 reached the hospital she was informed that the deceased had expired due to stab injuries. Accordingly, she lodged a complaint (Ex.PW1/C) to the Police and her statement (Ex.PW1/D) was recorded by the SDM.