MANGAL SINGH SUBBA Vs. STATE OF SIKKIM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 19/4/2002 by the learned Sessions Judge, South & West, Sikkim whereby the appellant Mangal Singh Subba convicted under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for committing the murder of his wife, Budhamati Lepcha and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000.00 and in default of payment of fine to undergo further imprisonment for six months.

(2.) The deceased Budhamati Lepcha was first married to one Reshi Kapoor and thereafter nearly about one year prior to the date of the occurrence to the appellant Mangal Singh Subba. The appellant and the deceased used to reside together in the same house at Bara Samdong Busty, West Sikkim. The deceased died in the evening of 5th July 2001. The same evening, the appellant either by himself or through his brother Suk Bahadur Subba (PW-5) sent information to his father-in-law and other members of the family of the deceased and also the neighbours that the deceased was seriously III and they should visit the house immediately. They visited the house and found that the wife of the appellant had already died. They also found some marks of injury on the body of the, deceased. Suspicion, therefore, arose that the death was not natural and there was some foul play. On 6/7/2001 at around 15.30 hours, Nay Tshering Lepcha PW-1 the father of the deceased lodged a complaint with the Kaluk Police Station. West Sikkim to the effect that foul play was suspected in the matter of the death of the deceased. Thereupon, UD case No. 6(7) 2001 dated 6/7/2001 was registered under Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Inquest was conducted on the body of the deceased on the same date, that is. 6/7/200 1 at 1800 hrs by Sub-Inspector Sonam Rinzing Shenga PW-15 who was the Officer-in-Charge of Kaluk Police Station and who subsequently investigated the case. He, vide his report Exhibit P-1. found the following injuries on the body of the deceased: Injuries

(3.) During the trial fifteen witnesses were produced on behalf of the prosecution. There is no direct evidence in support of the prosecution case. The evidence produced by the prosecution is to the effect that injuries were found on the body of the deceased by several witnesses who saw the body of the deceased raising a suspicion that the death of the deceased was caused by the appellant. The learned trial court held that the following four circumstances were established at the trial (i) the accused and the deceased used to reside together in the house of the accused, (ii) the injuries were found on the person of the deceased, (iii) the accused used to ill-treat the deceased, and (iv) the accused gave different versions about the death of the deceased to different persons and that the accused did not offer any cogent explanation as to the cause of the death of the deceased under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The learned Sessions Judge held that these circumstances clearly point to the conclusion that it was the accused and none else who was responsible for the murder of the deceased Budhamati Lepcha.