DAYA SHANKAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ONLY after two months of celebration of marriage Appellant -husband liquidated his wife Suchitra Devi by executing her killing with sharp edged weapon for which the lone witness is his brother.

(2.) THE facts of the case are tell -e -tell as it is alleged that though for about one and half months after the marriage the couple had been spending their days happily, only 15 days preceding the incident the marital relationship between them became strained as the husband was usually beating her in the house on resistance by the wife and brother to sell their household commodities. It was on 8th September, 1994 at about 8 a.m. when Sanjay Kumar Singh (P.W. 8), who happens to be the brother of the Appellant came to his house after playing musical instruments noticed his brother holding spade who shortly there -after threw the spade in the courtyard and made good his escape. There was copious blood below the cot and Suchitra Devi was lying in pool of blood with incised wound on her neck. The alarm raised by Sanjay Kumar Singh attracted the villagers to whom he allegedly narrated the incident witnessed by him. After the prosecution was launched on behest of the brother of the Appellant pursuant to the fardbeyan that was recorded at 6.15 hours on 9th September, 1994, investigation commenced during which the Police Officer entrusted with the task of carrying out investigation visited the place of occurrence, recorded statement of witnesses, seized blood stained spade and also blood stained earth from the Court yard noticed copies blood below the cot, prepared inquest report over the dead body of Suchitra Devi sent the dead body for post mortem examination and on its receipt, having concluded investigation laid charge sheet before the Court. In the eventual trial that commenced the State examined altogether 9 witnesses who were Sanjay Kumar maker of the fardbeyan the doctor the Police Officer and host of other witnesses.

(3.) CONTENTIONS raised at Bar on behalf of the Appellant to assail the findings recorded by the trial Court was that though in his early version Sanjay Kumar was narrating before the Court about the Appellant having celebrated his marriage at Calcutta, at trial discrepant statement was sought to be made in which it was stated that the villagers had arranged the marriage of the Appellant. Unable to make any meaningful criticism, it is sought to be urged that Sanjay Kumar Singh stated to have gained access in his house by pushing the door planks, but the objective finding recorded by the Police Officer would unmistakably show that there was no door plank. While commenting on the positive finding recorded by the doctor, it is sought to be urged that since the details about the rigor mortis was not record in his finding, one is left to speculate about the time of death of the deceased. Learned Counsel for the State, strongly resisting the contentions raised on behalf of the Appellant urged that the solitary eye witness who happened to be the brother of the Appellant deserves all credence as no animosity was attributed to him by the Appellant.