NIRAN Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SEVEN years ago, when Devalia left her home early morning to cut grass in the fields, little did she knew that she had a tryst with destiny. She did not return. Her dead body was seen in the fields and information was lodged by her husband's brother at the Police Station the same day in the evening. What is not disputed indeed is that there is no eye -witness to the occurrence and the conviction of the appellant rests purely on circumstantial evidence. Having been sentenced under Section 302 I.P.C. to R. I. for life and another five years under Section 394, I.P.C., he has appealed from jail.

(2.) NOW , some more facts about the prosecution case. When Devalia did not return home, her husband, her brother and other villagers started looking for her. At around noon her husband having discovered her dead body lying near a well at a distance of about 1 1/2 furlongs from the village, sent her brother (P.W. 4) to lodge report at the Police Station, which is Ex. P/14. The Officer -in -charge of the Police Station came to the village at night and held inquest over the dead body next day, on 19 -4 -1980, and sent the same for post -mortem examination. He also seized from the place of occurrence one blood smeared Kudra (sickle) lying near the dead body. The same day, he wrote out a First Information Report (Ex. P/18) at around 4.00 p.m., and recorded statements of some witnesses including P.Ws. 1 and 4. On 20 -4 -1980 and 22 -4 -1980 statements of some other witnesses were recorded by him. Somebody informed him that the accused was seen in Bamore area and he left accordingly for that place. On 23 -4 -1980, a pair of Painjana (anklets) was recovered from the accused by the Officer in -charge of Police Station, Bamore and the accused was arrested and brought with the seized article to Police Station Chanderi. On the same date, namely, 23 -4 -1980, the accused gave a statement to him that he had sold a pair of Chuda (bangles) to certain goldsmith of Bamore. On 24 -4 -1980, a pair of bangles was seized from. P.W.9 Ramdin and on 13 -5 -1980, the Tahsildar K.L. Jatav (P.W. 11) held proceedings for the identification of the seized articles the pair of Painjana and Chuda. Ex. P/13 was proved as the record of that proceeding. Autopsy surgeon (P.W. 10) proved the post -mortem report (Ex. P/13) and deposed that he found as many as seven incised injuries, inflicted by sharp cutting weapon, on the face, head and neck of the deceased. He opined that the cause of death was shock and hemorrhage, bleeding from brain and arteries. The charge -sheet against the accused was filed on 21 -5 -1980.

(3.) LEARNED Government Advocate Shri Govind Singh, on the other hand, relied on four circumstances which, he submits, are not only conclusively proved, those circumstances rather conclusively established the guilt of the accused. He has stressed the following circumstances on which the trial Court relied, to sustain the conviction and sentence passed against the accused :