STATE Vs. HOLI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this leave to appeal under Section 378 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.PC for short), the State seeks to question the legality of the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi in sessions case No.55/2001. By the impugned judgment, the learned Judge has held that the respondent was innocent and entitled to acquittal from the charge framed against him for alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'the IPC').

(2.) The case set up by the prosecution was that on receipt of information that a lady tenant of one Nanhe lal had died in a quarrel, the investigating officer reached the spot and found that in one room, adjoining the main gate, one lady with strangulation/ligature marks on her neck, was lying dead on a folding bed. Her name was disclosed to be Kamla (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased'). She was stated to be the wife of the respondent, namely, Holi Ram. In his statement to the investigating officer, made at the spot, the said Nanhe Lal, stated that about 8/10 days ago, one person, namely, Anjora had taken one room on rent and was living there with two other boys; all of them were working in a hotel; on 26 July 1999 one lady, namely, the deceased, came there and informed him that she was the wife of Anjora and had come from the village; thereafter the other two persons, who were living with Anjora left that place and the deceased and Anjora started living in the said room as husband and wife; on 30 July 1999 one person, namely, the respondent, came there and told him that the deceased was his wife and she had come from the village in Madhya Pradesh after leaving behind her children; long discussions between the deceased, Anjora and the respondent took place as the deceased was adamant on her living with Anjora; ultimately it was settled that Anjora shall leave the place on the same day and the deceased and the respondent will live in the said room; as agreed Anjora left the place around 11:00 PM with his bag and baggage; he locked the main gate of the house from inside; the respondent, the deceased and their four year old son Bablu slept in the said room; on the next morning at about 6:00 AM, the respondent called him and told him that the deceased was not speaking, whereupon he and his wife Nirmala went to the said room and saw that the deceased was lying dead on the folding bed with marks on her neck and her son Bablu was sleeping on the floor. Nanhe Lal thus, informed the police that he was convinced that the respondent had killed his wife on account of her infidelity. On the basis of the statement of Nanhe Lal, a formal FIR was registered against the respondent for an offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and he was arrested. After investigation, charge sheet was filed against the respondent.

(3.) In support of its case, the prosecution examined 14 witnesses, including Nanhe Lal-PW6, his wife Nirmala-PW5, Ashok Kumar-PW12, real brother of the deceased. In defence, the respondent examined one witness-DW1, namely, his son Bablu.