FATEH Vs. THE STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FATTE , aged 40 years, son of Mai Chand and a resident of village Gaddi Kheri in Police Station Sadar Rohtak, has filed this appeal against the judgment dated the 7th of June, 1966, of Shri K.S. Sidhu, Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtak, convicting him of an offence under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for intentionally causing the death of his brother Surat Singh, aged 42 years, and of another under section 326 of the Indian Penal Code for causing grievous hurt to his own wife Shrimati Santokhi (P.W. 4) on the night between the 10th and 11th of May, 1965, and sentencing him on the two counts to imprisonment for life and rigorous imprisonment for two years respectively, the sentences having been directed to run concurrently.

(2.) THE case for the prosecution may be stated thus. Surat Singh deceased, who was an elder brother of the appellant, was a bachelor and had developed illicit corrections with Shrimati Santokhi (P.W. 4), the wife of the appellant. The appellant naturally resented Surat Singh's misconduct and used to beat Shrimati Santokhi in order to wean her away from the path of immorality for sometime before the occurrence, the appellant had ceased to be on speaking terms with the deceased.

(3.) THE learned Additional Sessions Judge found that the statement made by Shrimati Santokhi (P. W. 4) to he Committing Magistrate was a narration of the truth and that she had resiled therefrom at the trial with the object of saving her husband from punishment. He also regarded the deposition of Lekhu (P.W. 5) to "be trustworthy. Certain portions of the testimony of Biru (P.W. 6), a younger brother of the appellant, were found by him to be lending corroboration to Shrimati Santokhi's statement before the Committing Magistrate. He was further of the opinion that the medical evidence supported the prosecution case and that the appellant had been shown to have absconded immediately after the occurrence. It was in this view of the matter that he convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforesaid.