MEHARBAN Vs. STATE OF MADHA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of ORDER Ltd. 23rd August 1988 delivered by AddI. Sessions Judge. Alirajpurin S.T. 29/88, holding the appellant guilty of offence u/s. 302 IPC and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life. This appeal was preferred from jail. As the appellant was unrepresented Shri GS Solanki appeared for him as his counsel provided by legal Aid Committee of this Court he is heard along with the learned Govt. Advocate, Shri SK Nigam.

(2.) The accused was living in a village Sondhwa within the jurisdiction of District Jhabua. It was on 1st Feb, 87 that his wife Rashida caught fire and ultimately succumbed to the burns on 14.2.1987. On her death it was Gani Mohammed, who lodged a report Ex. P. 5 at Police Station, Sondhwa. As per this report the appellant had forcibly kept Rashida as his wife about 2 or 3 months prior to the incident which occurred on 1.2.87. While she was cooking her sari caught fire, she sustained burns, but instead of rushing her to hospital she was being treated in village itself by appealing some indigenous medicine and ointments. Her condition, however, deteriorated and she ultimately died on 14.2.1987. On report Ex. P. 5 being lodged the Police machinery was geared into motion. Initially a case of suspected unnatural death was registered u/s 147 Cr. P.C. but on enquiry it was converted to one under Sec. 302 IPC r/w 5. 201 IPC. The appellant was arrested during the course of investigation on 22nd April, 87, vide arrest memo Ex. P .8. He was also sent for medical examination on next day, Le. On 23rd April, 87. His injury report is Ex. P. 6-A. On completion of investigation the accused was charged and tried for offence punishable u/s. 302 IPC r/w 201 IPC. The prosecution examined as many as witnesses to prove the charge. The trial Court while acquitting the accused of charge u/s. 201 IPC, found him guilty of offence punishable u/s 302 IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment hence this appeal.

(3.) Shri Solanki, appearing for the appellant assailing the prosecution evidence submitted that none of the witnesses examined by the prosecution, is reliable on account of their belated disclosure of the incident The so called witnesses are cooked up by the police and no conviction can be sustained on the basis of their evidence. Shri Nigam, learned G.A. appearing for the state on the other hand maintained that the conviction as recorded by the trial Court is proper and does not call for any interference.