AMBAI MAJHI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AMBAI Majhi (appellant) has been convicted under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentenced to imprisonment for life. Though he has been convicted under 201, I.P.C., no separate sentence has been passed. The appellant was first married to one Kapura Dal through whom he has a son Bhuchand Majhi (P.W. 6). Later on he married Salge (the deceased). After the second marriage, the first wife left the house and lived with her brother in another village; but P.W. 6, aged 6 years, remained with the father. In the night of Gamha Purnima day (5 -8 -63) there was a folk dance. The appellant was singing and the deceased joined the chorus. As the deceased somewhat faltered in the chorus, the appellant asked her to go back home. As she expressed unwillingness, the appellant forcibly took her back home. At home he asked her to serve food. As she refused, he assaulted her with a bamboo stick. After she fell down, he throttled her and pierced an arrow on the right side of her chest. On the next morning, P.W. 11, a brother of the appellant found him weeping in front of the house. On being asked the appellant stated that his wife died. P.W. 11 called some of the villagers who found the deceased lying in the bed room of the appellant with bleeding injury on the right side of the chest. They also found profuse blood lying on the floor. The villagers sent for Dibru Majhi (accused 2), who is the ex -chowkidar of the village. On being asked by accused 2, the appellant confessed in the presence of the villagers that he killed the deceased. He brought out the blood -stained arrow from the thatch and showed it to the villagers. Accused 2 was asked to lodge F.I.R. at the police station. It may be noted that the Chowkidari system had been abolished by then, and that though accused 2 was not the Chowkidar, the villagers were under a wrong impression that, he had authority to look into these matters. Accused 2 demanded Rs. 2 towards his expenses if he was to go to the thana for lodging the F.I.R. The appellant paid Rs. 1.75 nP. and both the accused left to the thana. At about noon, both of them came back and accused 2 stated that the matter should be hushed up and no case should be started if the appellant paid a sum of Rs. 10 as hush -money to him. The appellant borrowed a sum of Rs. 12 from P.W. 12 by pledging his bullock and gave Rs. 10 to accused 2. The appellant and some of the villagers carried the dead body to the cremation ground and burnt it. Thus the dead body was not available for postmortem examination.

(2.) ACCUSED 2, who has been convicted under Section 201/109, I.P.C. and sentenced to R. I. for one year, has not filed any appeal.

(3.) THE learned Sessions Judge found that the death of the deceased was homicidal. This finding is not disputed in view of the admitted case of the appellant that he found his wife killed by somebody and that he pulled out the blood -stained arrow from the chest of the deceased who was lying in a pool of blood. The only question for consideration is whether appellant killed the deceased.