FALKU Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated March 9, 1998 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (Atrocities on Women), Sri Ganganagar, convicting the appellant under Sections 302 and 498 A of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine to suffer simple imprisonment for three months and two years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine to suffer simple imprisonment for one month respectively, the appellant has preferred this appeal on the grounds mentioned in the memo of appeal and as canvassed before us by the learned counsel for the appellant.

(2.) The facts giving rise to the present appeal, stated briefly, are that on 9-2-95 at about 8.30 P.M. Navibux filed a written first information report Ex. P/1 in Police Station, Suratgarh alleging therein that his daughter Rajabi was married to Falku, the present accused about six years ago and Falku was torturing her for bringing additional dowry. The first information report further quotes previous incident of such demand of dowry and torture on non fulfilment thereof. It clearly recites that on 9-2-95 one Sikander and Jawaya came to the complainant and told him that his daughter Rajabi is lying dead in the compound of Falku, the accused. The complainant with others came to Suratgarh and saw that Rajabi had been killed by strangulation. The first information also recites the confession made by the accused before the persons named in the first information report and request is then made that action against Falku be taken. Investigation was thereafter taken up. The accused was arrested and after completion of investigation the accused was prosecuted for committing murder of Rajabi, his wife. The prosecution examined 10 witnesses to prove its case and two witnesses were examined by the accused to prove his defence of alibi. According to the accused he was not present in the town Suratgarh when his wife met death and was at his village, Thukrana for cultivation purposes. On appreciation of oral and documentary evidence the learned Judge came to the conclusion of guilt and sentenced the accused as aforesaid to suffer imprisonment for life.

(3.) This judgment and order of conviction is assailed before us by the learned counsel Shri N. L. Joshi appearing on behalf of the accused on several grounds mentioned in the memo of appeal as also argued before us. The main and substantial contention of the learned counsel is that the entire story is false and concocted. No attempt has been made by the prosecution to bring forth the truth before the Court. There are inherent improbabilities in the depositions, material evidence which was available was not brought before the Court and, therefore, the order of conviction is unsustainable. According to the learned counsel even if the prosecution has proved the death of Rajabi to be homicidal, but has miserably failed to prove that the homicidal death was caused by the accused. The circumstances as disclosed by the evidence on record even if accepted as correct, do not lead to the only conclusion of guilt. Several doubts arise for which there is no answer in the evidence as led by the prosecution and in any event benefit of doubt is liable to be given to the accused. It was then contended by the learned counsel that the accused relied on certain judgments of the Supreme Court and this Court that normal human reaction to throttling of a human being by a human being is physical resistance and normally even weak persons fiercely resist. If the prosecution evidence is to be accepted in relation to the occurrence there should have been sufficient evidence on the person of accused Falku for marks of scuffle which in all probability must take place in every case of strangulation, unless of course the allegation is of strangulation by deceit.