MADI ADMA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellant has been convicted under Section 302, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life.

(2.) THE Appellant was the Husband of the deceased. The prosecution case is that he killed the deceased during night of 13 -2 -1967. The defence is one of denial. The learned Sessions Judge held that the death was homicidal and that the accused killed the deceased.

(3.) THE only question far consideration is whether the accused killed the deceased. There are no eye -witnesses to the occurrence. The learned Sessions Judge based the conviction of the accused on the extra judicial confession and other circumstantial evidence. He also relied an the judicial confession (Ext. 12) and statement of the accused in the committing Court. We do not place any reliance an the judicial confession as sufficient time was not given to the accused far cool reflection. We also do not place any reliance an the statement of the accused in the committing Court which was to the effect. 'She was wayward and disobedient to my order and when I protested against her action she came to beat me. So I killed her'. The confession, so made, cannot be accepted in part. If at an it is to be taken into consideration, the whale must be taken into consideration. We accordingly do not place reliance on the statement in the committing Court as amounting to a confession.