JOSE Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Is absolute perfection in proof to be insisted to record/uphold a verdict of guilty and conviction? Is there any distinction between the "belief in the existence of a fact by a court and its satisfaction "that a prudent person ought to proceed on the supposition that such fact exists"? Is such "belief invariably to be insisted in all criminal cases? In the wake of the same definition for the expression 'proved' in Civil and Criminal trials under S.3 of the Evidence Act how can the traditional insistence on a superior probative satisfaction in a criminal trial - that of proof beyond the shadow of a reasonable doubt, be justified? -

(2.) These thoughts are aroused in our mind incidentally in this case, where the appellant challenges the verdict of guilty, conviction and sentence in an indictment for uxoricide under-S.302 IPC.

(3.) The prosecution alleged that the appellant herein has caused the death of his wife Jessy @ Jessamma, who was nine months' pregnant, on 30.4.2002 at about 1.30 a.m. by inflicting multiple injuries on her by stabbing her With a sharp knife-MO 11. The prosecution alleged that such injuries were inflicted by the accused on his wife on account of suspicion regarding her chastity.