ASHOK Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant has preferred the present appeal being aggrieved with the judgment dated 8.8.2006 passed by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Chhindwara in ST No. 79/2005 whereby the appellant has been convicted of the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment with fine of Rs.2,000/ - and two years' rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.500/ - respectively. Default sentence in lieu of payment of fine was also imposed. The sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) THE prosecution's case, in short, is that deceased Shashi Bai had been married to one Karan Singh resident of Village Parasiya. After sometime the deceased left the house of her husband and about eight years prior to the incident she started residing with the appellant in his house. Sunder (PW -9), brother of the deceased had objected and advised deceased Shashi Bai not to live with the appellant. In the month of December 2004 the appellant went to the house of Sunder (PW -9) and enquired about deceased Shashi Bai on a pretext that she had left his house 4 -5 days back and he could not find the deceased anywhere in his relations. On 18.12.2004 Sunder (PW -9) lodged a missing report at Police Station Parasiya. On 19.12.2004 ASI R.K. Jaiswal (PW -13) called the appellant at Police Station Parasiya and interrogated him in the matter. He had recorded the memo Ex.P -1 under Section 27 of the Evidence Act that the appellant killed the deceased and her body was buried near the funeral ground. He gave an intimation about the dead body of the deceased and equipments used in burying the body of the deceased. Thereafter a permission was sought from the SDM concerned to dig the place shown by the appellant to recover the dead body of the deceased. After getting the permission, the body of the deceased had been dug out in presence of the Tahsildar and a Panchayatnama -lash Ex.P - 2A (memo relating to the position of the dead body) was prepared. Also one small spade and one pickaxe had been seized from the appellant and a seizure memo Ex.P -7 was prepared. A little portion of soil was also recovered from the place where the deceased was buried. The dead body of the deceased was duly identified by Sahasram (PW -1) and Sunder (PW -9). The dead body of the deceased was sent for the postmortem. Dr. P.K. Soni (PW -12) had performed the postmortem on the body of the deceased and gave his report Ex.P -21A. He found that on left portion of her chest, the body was depressed and ribs No. 4 to 6 were broken under that depression. He opined that the deceased died due to injuries caused on her vital parts and consequential shock. However, the viscera was preserved and sent for the Forensic Science Examination. The various articles were also seized and sent for their Forensic Science Examination. In the FSL report, no poison was found in the viscera of the deceased. After due investigation, the charge sheet was filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chhindwara, who committed the case to the Sessions Court and ultimately it was transferred to the First Additional Sessions Judge, Chhindwara.

(3.) THE Additional Sessions Judge, Chhindwara after considering the evidence adduced by the prosecution convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned above.