LUVANA VAGHUMAL KHERAJMAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant was convicted for the offence-Under Section 302 IPC of murdering his wife-and sentenced to transportation for life. He is a displaced person and lived with his-wife and three daughters in a room on the ground floor of a building in Kutiana. The adjoining, rooms on the ground floor are occupied by Jivat-mal Lalchand. The rooms on the upper floor are occupied by Timamal Sabumal. Across the-road and in front of the deli of the appellant's, house live Dadumal Devandas and Kanayala Sunderdas. The appellant's father-in-law Anandmal Asan-das, who lives in Bhavnagar, had come two days before the offence to take the appellant's wife with him. The offence is alleged to have been committed during the night between 4-4-53 and 5-4-53. According to prosecution the appellant was sleeping with his wife and their youngest daughter in the room. Jiwatmal and the appellant's two other daughters were sleeping in the court yard. Anandmal was sleeping on the floor with Timamal. At about 1 or 1-30 a. m. Jiwatmal woke up on hearing cries coming from the appellant's room. Someone was crying "murder murder. " Jiwatmal thereupon called Timamal and Anandmal, who came down on hearing Jiwatmal's cries. They all rushed to the appellant's room and called' him to open the door, which was bolted from. inside. The appellant however did not open the door and they looked through a widow. A kerosene night lamp was burning in the room and with the aid of its light they saw the appellant's wife lying on the floor in a pool of blood while the appellant was pacing the room in an agitated state of mind. His Dhoti and shirt were stained with blood. Jiwatmal and others then rushed out of the deli and called out to other neighbours for help. Kanyalal Sunderdas and Dadumal Devandaa came down on hearing the cries. The appellant, in the meantime, opened the rear door of his room abutting on a road and went away. Jiwatmal and Timamal tried to chase him but they could not catch him and he disappeared in the darkness of the night. Meanwhile the Police Constable Tarachand Gordhan happened to pass by. Kanyalal told him that the appellant had murdered his wife and had run away towards the cemetery and the corpse was lying in the house. The appellant's father Kherajmal had also come up by this time. The Constable therefore went Into the room and had a look at the corpse and then went to the Police Station where he gave information to the Sub-Inspector of Police. The Sub-Inspector immediately came to the scene. The floor of the room was found full of blood and the muddamal blood-stained knife was recovered from under a carpet of one of the cots. In the meanwhile the appellant was seen hiding in a ruined house in the cemetery. He was found stark naked by some other Constable and his father Kherajmal on being told about it lent him a shirt and a Dhoti. He was arrested by the police at about 3 p. m. The blood-stained Dhoti and shirt which he had worn during the night were found in another adjoining ruin. These clothes and the knife are found by the Government Serologist to be stained with human blood.

(2.) A post mortem examination of the dead body revealed that the deceased had 20 injuries on her person, 14 of which were stab wounds and contused wounds. They were all on the neck and shoulders and near the clavicle bone. One injury had punctured the carotid after causing haemorrhage and in the opinion of the Doctor death was due to loss of blood by haemorrhage. The appellant denied having committed the offence and pleaded utter ignorance of the murder. The cross-examination of prosecution witnesses was however directed to showing that the appellant was of unsound mind. Two defence witnesses Revachand Savaldas and Thanumal Gulmal were also examined in support of the plea of insanity. The learned Additional Sessions Judge held that the appellant had committed the murder and rejected his plea of insanity and convicted and sentenced him as above.

(3.) THAT the appellant fatally stabbed his wife with the muddamal knife and committed the offence of murder was not disputed before us and it is now impossible to dispute it. We have described the injuries on the deceased and the nature of the wounds leaves no doubt that whoever caused them must have intended to cause her death or to cause such bodily injuries to her which were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. That the appellant was the person responsible for the injuries is equally clear. Anandmal Ex. 8, Jiwatmal Ex. 16 and Timamal Ex. 19 were the first to come on the scene and they saw the woman lying on the floor and the appellant pacing the room in an agitated state of mind and his dhoti and the shirt were stained with human blood. The appellant was alone with his wife at the time of the murder and the room was bolted from inside and no one else could have entered it. He was seen running away when the alarm was given and found hiding in a ruin nearby. He had discarded the bloodstained clothes and according to prosecution he had even attempted to rub off the blood stains on his person with dust. These circumstances are incompatible with any other conclusion except that he and no one else could have committed the murder and the only point which requires to be considered is whether the appellant has succeeded in establishing the plea of insanity.