RAMLAL Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BEING aggrieved by the judgment and finding dated 26-9-1995 passed by IInd Addl. Sessions Judge, Ujjain in S. T. No. 222/92, whereby convicted the appellant under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC, sentenced to R. I. for life and two years with fine of Rs. 500/-; in default of payment of fine further two months additional sentence, the appellant has filed this appeal. The substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the prosecution case before? Trial Court was that on 18-1-1991 Satyanarayan (P. W, 13) has lodged a report which was recorded in Rojnamcha Sanha (daily diary) No. 612 at 3. 40 P. M. vide Ex. P-24. According to this report, the wife of the appellant had eloped with one Gopichand Koushal on 18-12-1990. Thereafter appellant and witness Satyanarayan brought her hack from Dewas after pacifying her. When at 3. 00 p. m. Satyanarayan reached at the well of Ramlal to see Kalabai, Kalabai was not present there and Ramlal informed him that she had went day before yesterday to somewhere. He was not knowing where she had gone. According to Satyanarayan, he was having belief that Kalabai did not ran away but appellant might have eloped her or killed her. On the basis of this information, investigation commenced and Sub Inspector Arvind Thambe (P. W. 15) recorded Dehati Nalishi (Ex. P-22) and took the appellant into his custody. The appellant confessed the guilt before the police and made a statement that she was killed by throttling and her dead body was thrown in the well. Thereafter in pursuant to this information dead body was recovered by the police. After recording of memorandum statement of the present appellant (Ex. P-12), police had also recorded the memoranda statement of acquitted accused Anantilal. Thereafter both were taken to the well and both brought out the dead body outside the well. The recovery memo of dead body is Ex. P-13. The dead body was identified as the dead body of Kalabai and the same was sent for post-mortem examination. Dr. S. K. Shrivastava (P. W. 5) performed the post-mortem. His report is Ex. P-8 and according to his evidence, deceased did not die because of drowning but died because of asphyxia due to throttling. Her both the hands were tied by her sari and the same was also surrounded around her neck and on the sari one rope was tied with three knots. Some abrasions were noticed by the doctor at the neck of the deceased. After necessary investigation, charge-sheet was filed. The appellant abjured his guilt and claimed for trial. The learned Trial Court, after examining the prosecution witnesses and hearing both the parties, convicted the appellant as mentioned above. Hence, this appeal.

(3.) WE have heard Shri V. S. Chouhan, learned Counsel for appellant and Shri G. Desai, learned Dy. A. G. for the State.