JAGDISH LAL Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD and gone through the record.

(2.) APPELLANT has been convicted by the trial Court (Sessions Court) of offences punishable under Sections 323 and 325 of the Indian penal Code for voluntarily causing hurt and grievous hurt to his wife PW-4 Santosh Kumari.

(3.) GRIEVANCE of the appellant is that the evidence on record has not been appreciated in the right perspective. Contention of the learned counsel is that as a matter of fact, the injured was having illicit relations with PW-1 Kuldip Singh and that when all of a sudden the appellant went to the shop of the injured (his wife), he did not notice her in that shop and then knocked the door of adjoining shop of PW-1 Kuldip Singh and found that his wife was there in the room of said Kuldip Singh. It was also his plea that he had been suspecting from before that PW-4 Santosh Kumari was having illicit relations PW-1 Kuldip Singh. To prove this plea he examined one of his sons, namely DW-1 Tilak Raj, aged about 21 years. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that it was in the light of these facts that the evidence led by the prosecution was required to be examined.