P. Venkatarama Reddi, J. - (1.) THE appellant herein was convicted under Section 304 Part II, I.P.C. and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000. THE High Court reversed the order of acquittal of the Additional Sessions Judge, Shivpuri in Sessions Case No. 90 of 1986 in which charges were framed against the appellant under Sections 302 and 498A of I.P.C. THE appellant was charged of committing the murder of his wife Kalpana on 23.5.1986 at about 2.00 p.m. at his house. THE appellant married Kalpana in May, 1985. At the time of the incident which took place a year later, she was in the advanced stage of pregnancy.
(2.) THE accused Raj Kumar and his brother Shyamlal (P.W. 15) were residing in the same building. Adjacent to this building, their elder brother Keshav Prasad Agrawal (P.W. 17) was residing. THE accused Raj Kumar was occupying the third floor. It was in the bed room of the accused that his wife was brutally attacked. P.W. 15-the brother of the accused invited Suresh Kumar Chokse (P.W. 2), Gopal Krishna Dandatiya (P.W. 5) and Mahesh Prasad Pandey (P.W. 13) for lunch on that crucial day. At about 2.00 p.m., after hearing some noise and cries they went to the upper floor of the building and found the wife of the accused lying almost naked with face down in a pool of blood in the bed room with injuries all over the body. P.W. 15 went inside the room and asked her as to what happened. She replied "Ve Mar Gaye" (the literal translation of 'Ve' being 'they'). The mother of the accused, who was in the 2nd floor, told P.W. 13 while weeping that some altercation was going on upstairs. The victim succumbed to the injuries even before she reached the hospital. The post-mortem examination of the body was done by P.W. 3 at Shivpuri District Hospital at about 4.00 p.m. on the date of incident. He noticed two incised wounds-one 'L' shaped over parietal region of scalp, the vertical limb of wound measuring 4 cm. x 5 cm. x scalp deep and horizontal limb being 2 cm. x 1/2 cm. x scalp deep. Two adjacent incised wounds were present over posterior and middle part of frontal region of scalp. Contusions over many parts viz., right shoulder, left eyebrow, left arm, right and left thighs, dorsum of left hand extending upto left shoulder and a railway track contusion of 6 cm. x 2 cm. over lateral aspect of right thigh were found. Horizontal abrasion of 4-1/2" x 1/2" over left side of chest just below rest of left clavicle and another abrasion of 3 cm. x 1 cm. over right anterior auxiliary line at 7th and 8th rib level were also found. Dark red fresh clotted blood was present around the wounds. The examination of uterus showed a well grown foetus with fully developed male baby which was found destroyed. P.W. 3 expressed the view that the cause of death was shock due to haemorrhage from various injuries sustained by her. In cross-examination, he clarified that haemorrhage due to injury Nos. 1 and 2 resulted in death and that no fracture of skull has been found and no injury to the brain was noticed. However, immediate unconsciousness could be caused due to injury Nos. 1 and 2. They were not of such a nature that would cause immediate death. He opined that injury Nos. 1 and 2 would have been caused with a sharp-edged weapon and it cannot be caused by a hammer or by article 'O' (iron pipe/rod). P.W. 4, another Medical Officer also stated that the cut wounds mentioned as injury Nos. 1 and 2 could be caused with a sharp-edged weapon.
(3.) THE brother of the deceased (P.W. 1) lodged the report to the police at 3.00 p.m. and the F.I.R. was registered on that basis. In the report, he stated that at about 2.00 p.m. he got information from P.W. 2, with whom he was employed, that his brother-in-law Raj Kumar had beaten his sister and her condition was serious and that she was taken to hospital. He added that at the hospital also, he came to know through others that the accused had beaten his sister. Thus, he clearly incriminated the accused in the report given to the police. THEn the investigation was started by P.W. 21. He had called P.W. 10-the Scientific Assistant, who prepared site plan and inspection notes, according to which there were extensive blood-stains on walls, clothes, table and mongri. P.W. 21 seized the wooden mongri and the other blood-stained articles found inside the room which was the scene of offence. As seen from Ext. P. 8, the wooden piece ('mongri', used while washing clothes) is of the length of one foot and width of three inches. P.W. 21 arrested the accused on the next day, i.e. on 24.5.1986 and at the instance of the accused an iron pipe of the length of two feet, round in shape at one side and flat at another side was seized from the bath room. It was noted in the seizure memo (Ext. P. 19) that blood was present at the flat side of the seized iron pipe. Though P.W. 21 stated in his deposition that iron rod and wooden piece were seized at the same time, it is clear from Ext. P. 19 and P. 8-seizure memos, that only the iron pipe was seized after the arrest of the accused. On the same day, the Investigating Officer (P.W. 21) having found traces of blood on the body of the accused, took the accused to Forensic Science Laboratory's mobile unit and the dry blood scrapings were collected by the in-charge of the mobile unit (P.W. 10). It may be mentioned at this stage that the reports of F.S.L. in regard to seized articles, etc., have not been produced for reasons best known to the prosecution. THE Investigating Officer also recorded the statements of various witnesses including P.W. 17-Keshave Prasad (the elder brother of the accused) and P.Ws. 2, 5, 13, 15 and others. Surprisingly, the younger sister of the deceased (P.W. 8), who allegedly came to the house in the morning of 23.5.1986 and met the deceased and accused, and her mother were examined about ten days later. In fact, P.W. 8 denied that she ever gave the statement to police. THE accused, in the course of his examination under Section 313 either answered the questions in the negative or made bare denial. THEre was no eye-witness to the incident. All the witnesses, who were produced for unfolding the prosecution case, in particular P.Ws. 2, 13, 15 and 17, were declared as hostile witnesses by the prosecution after their chief examination in part.;