NIKA RAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THERE is before vis an appeal against the conviction, of Nika Ram under Section 302 I. P. C. and the sentence of death awarded to him as well as a reference by the Sessions Judge of Mahasu for the confirmation of the sentence of death.

(2.) THE prosecution case was : The appellant came to the house of the Naib Tehsildar, Magistrate II Class, Kothkhal, S. K. Mahajan (P. W. 15), at 10. 30 p. m. , on 16-9-1969, and knocked at his door. The appellant appeared nervous, and, as soon as the Magistrate had opened the door, the appellant stated that he had murdered his wife. Thereupon, the Magistrate asked him to sit down and be calm and then made enquiries about the matter. The appellant unburdened his mind by stating that his wife was a woman of loose character, and his relations with her were bad and that she had given birth to an illegitimate child. The appellant was clad in a kutchha (underwear) and a coat which appeared to : be wet. The appellant explained that he had attempted to commit suicide by jumping, into water, but was unsuccessful. The Magistrate asked him to think over the matter as he was going to record his statement. As the appellant had no objection and indicated his willingness to make a statement voluntarily, the Magistrate recorded that statement in the words of the appellant (Ex. PH/i ). This statement is admitted by the appellant to have been signed by him. The Magistrate had read out the statement to the appellant who had admitted it to be correct before he signed it. This statement was the basis of the prosecution case. It is the only piece of evidence, apart from the circumstances said to be corroborative, on which the conviction of the appellant rests.

(3.) THIS statement was to the effect Shmti Churl, the murdered woman, who was married to the appellant in 1958, gave birth to an illegitimate son in 1964, and. she had been, for that reason, living" with her parents along with the child since 1964. The appellant had tried to call her back, but she had not returned. At the time of Shivaratri, about eight months before the occurrence, the deceased came back. But, as she was "corrupt", she used to go back to the house of her parents. At about 9. 30 p. m. , on 16-9-1969, when the appellant and the deceased were going to bed. the appellant enquired whose child the deceased had borne. She not only did not disclose the name of the father, but started abusing the appellant. After that, she went to sleep. The appellant started thinking over the matter and got worried up by the idea that the child was illegitimate and his wife was corrupt so that she deserved to be put to death. At that time, a lamp was lit. The appellant got up from the bed and took a "khokhri" lying in the room and struck three blows on the neck of Shmti Churi, and, thereby, killed her. The statement also revealed that a white shirt, which was torn at the arms and was blood stained, and a "khokhri". were thrown in the room before the appellant left the dead body on the bed after shutting the door of the room. It ended by saying "punish me". The appellant, who was said to have been a compounder for some time up to 5 or 6 years before the occurrence, had signed the statement in English. Below his signature appeared the signature of the Magistrate and the date 16-9-1969 and the time 11 p. m.