THE STATE Vs. GURBACHAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) GURBACHAN Singh respondent was tried by the Sessions Judge, Patiala, for a charge -under S. 302, Penal Code, for the murder of his own wife Mst. Inder Kaur. He, was however. convicted only for culpable homicide not amounting to murder under S. 304 (1) and sentenced to 31/2 years R. I. The convict has not appealed and appears to be satisfied with the conviction and sentence. This is a State appeal against the supposed acquittal of the respondent of the charge of murder with a prayer chat his conviction be altered to one under S. 302. Penal Code and also that the sentence be enhanced.

(2.) MT . Inder Kaur was married to the respondent some 13 years ago and gave birth to three children; one of them, a girl, died before couple migrated from Pakistan and settled in the refugees camp at Dukhniwaran, Patiala. Inder Kaur's brothers Darshan Singh P. w. 8 and Sohan Singh had also migrated to Patiala and were living in another part of the town known as Raghomajra. On the day of the incident in question, which took place on the after -noon of 8th May 1952, Darshan Singh and his wife went to take Inder Kaur to their house. This was objected to by the accused on the ground that she had come from their side only a few days before. He did not want her to go with them also because he suspected her of unchastity and of her brother's privet in her affairs. After the brother had returned Mt. Inder Kaur insisted that she should be allowed to go and this was strongly resented by the accused. The latter then took out a spear and thrust it at her neck, which pierced 'through' and through. A similar blow almost at the same place was repeated and two more were inflicted on her right thigh. The victim instantaneously succumbed to the injuries. The accused went out with the blood -stained spear in his hand. He proceeded to the Central Police Station and there lodged a report detailing what had lea him to kill his own wife. The spear was taken possession of by the Police and on being sent to the Chemical Examiner and Imperial Serologist was found to have human blood on it. Information of the report was sent to the Police Station Civil Lines to which the place of incident was attached and where the matter in the meantime had already been reported by Mohan Singh P. W. 3. Next day i.e. on 9th May the accused was produced before the A. D. M. Patiala before whom he made a detailed statement confessing his guilt.

(3.) BEFORE closing I would like to refer to the cases relied upon by the learned counsel for the respondent. In 'Abdul Khanan v. Emperor', : AIR 1939 Lah 436, the accused saw a man going out of the Chobara where his wife was at late hour of the night, He pursued the stranger but could not catch him. He asked the wife as to who he was. She did not reply but abused him in return. Besides, marks of semen were found on her vaginal contents. In - 'Jan Mahomed v. Emperor'. : AIR 1929 Lah 861, the wife, was leading a notoriously immoral life which was a common scandal of the village. Admittedly she had a young lover who appeared as a prosecution witness and deposed to his intimacy with the woman. On the night previous to the murder she had a mysterious and significant disappearance from the bed side of the husband and subsequent protest by the husband resulted in vulgar abuse by her. The husband started beating her with shoe, lost his control, picked up a rough stick which happened to be lying close by and struck the fatal blow to the erring wife which resulted in her death. In - 'Hira Singh v. Emperor',, AIR 1933 Lah 126 (2) the wife was leading an immoral life and had taken a house opposite to that of her husband for carrying on an intrigue with some one else. On the day of the occurrence she abused her husband and insulted him by saying that she would have his daughter and daughter -in -law ravished by the paramour. In - Inayat v. Emperor',, AIR 1933 Lah 869 (2) the accused's younger sister, the deceased, who had let her husband and was living under the care of accused, was suspected to be of an immoral character. On the night of the murder at about. 3 A. M. she had gone to meet a stranger in the cattle -shed at the back of the house for a clandestine purpose. When the accuses asked the deceased why she did not give up her evil ways she refused to listen to him and gave an insolent reply. Thereupon the accused gave a blow with a hatchet which caused her death. The facts of these cases were thus quite different and there was sufficient material to constitute grave and sudden provocation.