PHILIPOSE Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant, a teacher in a GovernmentHigh School , "in a heat of passion", had stabbed his wife to death and on this finding he is convicted for the offence under S. 302 IPC. and sentenced to imprisonment for life. His plea that the acts, if at all proved, fall under exception (1) to S. 300 IPC. has not been found favour with the trial judge.

(2.) A profile of the prosecution story is this: The appellant and his wife Pennamma and their two children were residing in their house in Aymanam Village , Kottayam Taluk. There used to arise skirmishes between the spouses and this seems to have been a common occurrence in the house. On 10-4-1982, the appellant came back to his house from outside at about 9. 15 p. m. and asked his wife to serve him food. This received only a cool response from his wife, who remained in her cot and told her husband that food is ready on the dining table and if he wants, he can eat it. The appellant then insisted on the food being served to him by his wife herself and if not obeyed, he threatened that the food kept on the table would be flung off to the court-yard. Upon this, his wife curtly replied "you may do as you like". This was followed by the exchange of some words as between them, but the wife was remaining in her bed without getting up. The appellant finally told her, "let me see who is the master of this house, you or P. So saying, he took out a knife from beneath the pillow of a bed and stabbed her on the back as she was lying on a cot inside the bed room. She stood up with that injury and staggered into the next room crying out that she is being stabbed. The appellant came out of the house and told some of the neighbours who reached there by then, that it was he who had stabbed her and that nobody need interfere in that matter. However, pw. !, one of the neighbours, managed to scale over the compound wall and reach the room, wherein the deceased was found lying bleeding. From there she was removed to the Medical College , Kottayam and the Doctor who examined her, pronounced her dead.

(3.) AS the accused had not admitted that the deceased had sustained the injury at his hand, the prosecution has the duty to prove the act alleged against the accused.