RAMSINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by Ramsingh against his conviction under sec. 302 of the Jaipur Penal Code and sentence of life imprisonment. The case has been reported for confirmation of the sentence because under the law of the former Jaipur State, a sentence of imprisonment for life had to be confirmed by the High Court.

(2.) THE prosecution story was briefly this. THE deceased Mst. Sia Dulari was the wife of the appellant. She was married to the appellant about four years before the incident took place on the 17th of May I949. She was then about fifteen years old. It is said that the relations between the appellant and his wife were strained because her father used to take her away often to his house. On the last occasion she had returned from her father's house about eight days before the 17th of May 1949. Her father again came to take her away on the 26th of May and she then made some complaint to him against her husband. This had led to a quarrel between the appellant's father and the father of the deceased. This annoyed the appellant and consequently, it is said that he murdered her on the morning of the 17th of May 1949 by stabbing her with a dagger. THEreafter, the appellant himself went to the Thana and made a report of the incident. This is Ex. P. 13. THE police immediately arrested the appellant and took up investigation of the case. THE condition of the appellant when he arrived at the Thana to make the first report has been described by Sub-Inspector Ramzan Ali. Both the appellant's hands were smeared with blood. He was putting on two Dhoties one above the other and the Dhoti which was next to the skin was saturated with blood. THEre was also an injury on the right knee of the appellant and the blood on his hands and clothes appeared to be fresh. THE Sub-Inspector took possession of the blood-stained Dhoti and prepared a recovery list. THEreafter, the appellant was taken to his house where the dead body of his wife was found in a room in the upper story. THEre were several wounds on the dead body and fresh blood was lying on the floor. An inquest report was prepared then and there. THE Sub-Inspector also found a sheath of a dagger lying near the head of the dead body. THE clothes which the deceased was wearing were also taken in possession and sealed and sent later for examination by the Chemical Examiner. Mst. Sarju, P. W. 1, produced a dagger and that was also taken in possession as it was supposed to be the instrument by which the murder had been committed and was blood-stained.

(3.) THE next case is Harnam Kishna vs. Emperor (A. I. R. 1935 Bom. 26 ). This was also a murder case in which the first information report had been made by the accused. THE learned Judges were of the view that if the first information report was given by the accused to a Police Officer and that informant admitted his own guilt, it was a confession which sec. 25 did not allow to be proved. If the confession showed opportunity for the offence, motive for the offence, and commission of the offence, it could not be said that the portion of it which dealt with opportunity, or the portion of it which dealt at with motive, could be treated as no part of the confession. THE Cal. case which we have referred above was distinguished in this case on the ground that the whole confession dealt with the events occurring on the night of the offence. THE learned Judges however, doubted whether the principle on which the Calcutta High Court proceeded in that case could be justified. THEre was no reference, however, to the Privy Council cases which we have mentioned above.