FARIDKHAN RAJJAK KHAN MUSALMAN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Ms. T. Khan, Advocate, appointed for the appellant, and Mr. T. Mirza, the learned A. P. P. for the respondent-State.

(2.) ON 17-1-1991, the 7th Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur, convicted the appellant Faridkhan s/o Rajjak Khan Musalman, for having committed offence under sections 302 and 201 I. P. C. and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life on first count and on the other count, to suffer R. I. for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- on each count, in default to suffer R. I. for seven days. The appellant has challenged his conviction by this appeal.

(3.) THE facts leading to the prosecution of the appellant can be briefly stated as under: the appellant Faridkhan was married to deceased Amna in the year 1981. A son by name Farooq was born to them. The appellant thereafter deserted his wife Amna, the deceased, and she had been living at her fathers place. As the deceased was not provided with any maintenance, she filed case against the appellant for maintenance. On 27-8-1988, the appellant-accused sent a message to his estranged wife Amna through Smt. Pushpa (P. W. 3 ). On this Pushpa (P. W. 3) came to the house of Abdul Rahim (P. W. 1), father of Amna, and as she was not at home, she told Nazama (P. W. 2), sister of the deceased Amna, that her brother-in-law (i. e. the appellant) was calling Amna. When Amna returned home, she received the message from Nazama (P. W. 2) and, therefore, she went to the house of Pushpa (P. W. 3) and from there she went with the appellant-accused Farid, and since then Amna was found missing. When father of Amna i. e. Abdul Rahim (P. W. 1) returned home and enquired about Amna, his daughter Nazama (P. W. 2) told him that she had gone to the house of Pushpa. On enquiring from Pushpa, he came to know that his daughter had left with Faridkhan, i. e. the appellant. As Amna did not return, Abdul Rahim (P. W. 1) took her search and waited for 2-3 days, but as she was not traced, he lodged the report with the police. Initially, police registered offences under sections 364, 365 I. P. C. against the appellant-accused, vide Crime No. 338/1998 of Police Station, Kamptee. The appellant-accused came to be arrested by the Police on 20-9-1998 vide arrest panchanama Exhibit 20. After his arrest, the police were able to discover the dead body of deceased Amna wife of Faridkhan Musalman buried in a pit of grenade firing site. On discovery of the dead body, the police prepared the spot and inquest panchanama and a requisition to Medical Officer to conduct postmortem at the spot as the dead body was highly decomposed, was sent. Dr. M. V. Rao (P. W. 7) conducted autopsy on the spot and gave opinion that the probable cause of death being strangulation of the neck which had led to suffocation and assifixiation shock and death is due to respiratory cardiac arrest. After the postmortem was over, the dead body was handed over to the father of the deceased for performing last rites. Police found that Faridkhan had two accomplices with him in the commission of crime, i. e. one Qadarali s/o Haider Ali Sayyad and Suraj s/o Narayan Swami Mudliyar. Police was able to arrest Qadar Ali son of Haider Ali Sayyad, whereas second accomplice Suraj Narayan Swami Mudliyar was found to have absconded. The police added offence under sections 302 and 201 I. P. C. In the course of investigation, the police had recorded statements of witnesses and also forwarded the articles seized to the Forensic Science Laboratory for the report. After the completion of the investigation, charge-sheet came to be filed against two persons i. e. appellant-accused and Qadar Ali for having committed offences under sections 364, 366, 306, 302 read with 34 of I. P. C. The case was then committed to the Court of Session for trial.