MAHESH RAM Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant appeal is preferred against the judgment and order dtd. 22/11/2014, passed in Sessions Trial No. 294 of 2012, State Vs. Mahesh Ram, by the court of Sessions Judge, Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar. By it, the appellant has been acquitted of the charge under Sec. 201 IPC but convicted under Sec. 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.50,000.00In default of payment of fine, to undergo, simple imprisonment for a further period of two years.

(2.) Facts necessary to appreciate the controversy, briefly stated, are as follows. According to the prosecution, the deceased was married to the appellant in the year 2001 and they were blessed with two children. The appellant would torture the deceased soon after the marriage. Some 3-4 days prior to the lodging of the FIR, he had burnt stomach, hands and feet of the deceased, of which marks were still present on the body of the deceased, when she died. Some 3-4 days prior to the lodging of the FIR, the deceased had come to her parental home. On 10/7/2011, in the evening, the appellant came to his matrimonial home and tendered apologies saying that in future, he would not commit such mistake. He regretted for his deeds. That night, he stayed in his matrimonial home alongwith the deceased. On 11/7/2011, in the morning at about 9:00, when the deceased went outside to answer the call of nature in the sugarcane fields of Munna Singh, the appellant followed her. Suddenly, the brother, mother and other villagers heard the shrieks of the deceased. PW1, Pawan Ram, PW2 Smt. Chanda Devi, PW3 Buddh Ram, PW5 Munna Lal and others noticed it. When PW1 Pawan Ram, the brother of the deceased, his mother PW2 Chanda Devi, the witnesses and villagers came outside, they saw the appellant running from the sugarcane fields towards the road, where he boarded a vehicle and disappeared. When PW1, Pawan Ram, PW2 Smt. Chanda Devi, PW3 Buddh Ram and PW5 Munna Lal reached at the spot, they saw that the deceased was dead and her throat was slit. The dead body of the deceased was still lying in the sugarcane field, when PW1 Pawan Ram lodged the FIR on 11/7/2011 at 10:30 a.m. at Police Station Sitarganj, District Udham Singh Nagar. Based on which, Case Crime No.113 of 2012, under Sec. 302, 201 IPC was lodged at the Police Station. The inquest of the dead body of the deceased was conducted on the same date, which began at about 11:00 a.m. and the post mortem was conducted on the same day at 4:40 p.m. The Investigating Officer prepared a site plan, took the blood stained and plain soil from the place of incident and sent it for forensic examination. He also sent other articles for forensic examination. The forensic examination report though detected blood on the clothes of the deceased, but on the soil, blood was not detected. During investigation, the appellant was absconding. The charge sheet was filed against the appellant under Sec. 302, 201 IPC as an absconder.

(3.) On 17/1/2013, the charge under Sec. 302 and 201 IPC was framed against the appellant. To which, he denied and claimed trial.