NAGJI Vs. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT Nagji was tried for the offence under Section 302 Indian Penal Code by the Sessions Judge, Partapgarh and by the judgment dated August 28, 1976 convicted for that offence and sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 200/ -, in default of payment of fine to undergo two months rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the prosecution case leading to the trial und conviction of the appellant is as under: On July 9, 1975 early in the morning Gautam (P.W. 1) brother of the appellant Nagji, whose houses are adjacent to each other, came out of his house to make water. Appellant Nagji enquired as who was there and on Gautam telling him that it was he, the former cried that his wife had died. Gautam asked him as to how that had happened. Nagji told him that he bad done away with her. On being questioned as to for what reason he had done so, Nagji told that he had done so in connection with the ornaments. Gautam (P.W. 1) immediately rushed to his father -in -law's house and informed his father -in -law Khatiya (P.W. 2) about Nagji killing his wife. Gautam (P.W. 1) and Khatiya (P.W. 2) then went to Bhimji (P.W. 3) and narrated what had happened. Bhimji (P.W. 3), at the instance of Gautam (P.W. 1) and Khatia (P.W. 2) went to lodge the report at police out -post Kotdi. Gautam (P.W. 1) and Khatia (P.W. 2) returned to the house of Nagji to keep watch Nagji went inside his house and bolted it from inside. Bhimji (P.W. 3) went to police out -post Kotdi and informed Natwarsingh (P.W. 7), Constable of the out -post, about the incident. Natwarsingh directed Bhimji to go to police, station. Arnod and himself went to the house of Nagji Natwarsingh (P.W. 7) some -how managed to catch hold of Nagji and kept him under watch. Bhimji (P.W. 3) reached police station Arnod and lodged on oral report at about 11.45 a.m. with the Station House Officer Bherusingh (P.W. 11). The Station House Officer reduced the report into writing which is Ex. P. 2. The Station House Officer went to village, Jirawata to the house of appellant Nagji. Natwarsingh (P.W. 7) was sitting there catching hold of the appellant Nagji. A number of persons of the vicinity were also there. The Station House Officer entered the room and found the dead body of Smt. Kastoori, wife of the appellant lying there in a pool of blood. Her clothes were smeared with blood. The Station House Officer prepared the panchnama of the dead body which is Ex. P. 1. He also prepared the site inspection memo Ex. P. 3 and site plan Ex. P. 4. He took the blood smeared earth from the site. The accused -appellant was arrested vide memo Ex. P. 8. His shirt Ex. 4 and Dhoti Ex. 5, having blood stains on them, were taken in possession vide memo Ex. P. 7. On that very day the appellant furnished information to the Station House Officer for getting recovered the 'aleta' (wooden lathi having an iron blade). The information reduced into writing is Ex. P. 10. In pursuance of that information the appellant got recovered 'aleta' Ex. 6, which the Station House Officer took in possession vide memo Ex. P. 6. It was suspected to have blood on the blade and some hair. The articles recovered were sealed then and there. The dead body of Smt. Kastoori was sent for post mortem examination to General Hospital, Partapgarh with Chamansingh, Constable at 4.30 p.m. On July 9, 1975 Dr. Ganendra Nath Rai conducted the autopsy over the dead body and prepared the post mortem examination report Ex. P. 5. The Doctor noted three punctured wounds, fourteen incised wounds and two contusions on the various parts of the dead body. On dissection the Doctor noted internal fractures on the head. According to the Doctor all the injuries were ante -mortem in nature and were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. The duration of death according to the Doctor was within 12 to 24 hours. The cause of death was shock and haemorrhage on accourt of the injuries sustained by Smt. Kastoori. The clothes of the dead body were received from the Doctor in a sealed condition by the Station House Officer. The Station House Officer sent the clothes with other articles to the Chemical Examiner, Jaipur, through Gulam Rasool (P.W. 10). The report of the Chemical Examiner is Ex. P. 12 and that of the Serologist is Ex. P. 13. The blood on all the articles sent was detected to be human blood.

(3.) UPON completion of necessary investigation, charge sheet against the appellant was filed in the Court of Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Partapgarh. The learned Magistrate finding a prima -facie case, exclusively triable by the courts of sessions, committed the appellant to the Court of Sessions Judge, Partapgarh to stand his trial. As the accused was not represented by any Counsel, the learned Sessions Judge appointed Amicus -Curiae to plead on his behalf. Since the accused was keeping totally quiet, the court considered it proper to ascertain whether he was capable of understanding the proceedings of the Court. The learned Judge, therefore, referred the appellant to the Chief Medical Officer, Partapgarh for mental examination. The Chief Medical Officer, Partapgarh requested the Court for getting the appellant examined at Udaipur Medical College. The appellant was sent to Udaipur Medical College for observation and examination. He was kept under observation there and examined on October 29, 1975. The Court received the report of Dr. P.S. Gehlot to the effect that nothing could be detected from the observation and examination of the accused to point out that he is insane. The learned Judge examined Dr. P.S Gehlot on March 9, 1976 in the Court. Dr. Gehlot stated that the behaviour of Nagji was normal and he was deliberately avoiding answering the questions. That, he was properly taking meals and was obeying the instructions properly. In the opinion of the Doctor, the accused was capable of understanding the proceedings of the Court. Having obtained this opinion through the report and the statement of Doctor Gehlot, the learned Sessions Judge charge -sheeted the appellant on March 9, 1976 for the offence under Section 302 Indian Penal Code. The accused did not reply to the charge. The then Sessions, Judge having been transferred charge under Section 302 Indian Penal Code was again framed and read over and explained to the accused on July 16, 1976. At that time also the accused did not reply to the charge and remained standing looking towards the ground. The learned Judge proceeded with the trial. Prosecution examined eleven witnesses in all to substantiate its case against the appellant. Questions were put to the accused for examining him under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure but he did not answer to any question and remained mute. No defence witness was examined. The trial Judge placed reliance on the prosecution evidence and held the appellant guilty and sentenced him as stated earlier.