Palok Basu and A. S. Tripathi, JJ. - (1.) THIS appeal has been filed by Kanti against the judgment and order dated 22.5.1979 passed by the Ilnd Additional Sessions Judge, Jalaun at Orai in S. T. No. 51 of 1978 convicting and sentencing the appellant under Section 302, I.P.C., to imprisonment for life.
(2.) THE Charge against the appellant was that on 22.10.1975 sometime before noon the appellant had committed the murder of his wife Smt. Lal Kunwar described also as Lahuri Babu by intentionally and knowingly causing such injuries on her neck and other parts of the body by means of spade which were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause her death and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 302, l.P.C. In the instant case the only evidence against the appellant which has been relied upon by the learned Trial Judge is the so-called judicial confession said to have been made by the appellant before the Executive Magistrate namely Sri Suraj Bhan Srivastava, S. D. M. Orai examined as P.W. 6. The Trial Judge has not relied upon so-called extra judicial confession sought to have been proved by two witnesses namely P.W. 3. Beni Madho and P.W. 5 Sumer. Similarly P.W. 1 Dhani Ram the father of the appellant, who had gone to lodge the FIR, at police station concerned on 22.10.1975 at 5.30 p.m. has turned hostile and therefore, rightly not relied upon by the Trial Judge. P.W. 7 Shyam Behari Shukla is the Station Officer and in his presence the first information report was allegedly lodged by P.W. 1 Dhani Ram. He immediately got the case registered through Ram Asrey Dixit Head Moharrir vide General Diary Entry No. 18. He allegedly recorded the statement of the Head Moharrir thereafter and performed the inquest on the dead body and also prepared photo nash and challan nash and the relevant letter for getting postmortem examination was written whereafter he handed over the dead body to the constables Bhagwati Prasad and Jitendra Kumar. The documents have been proved as Exts. Ka-6 to Ka-9. Then he prepared a site plan and recovered from the spot simple earth and blood stained earth and some clothes as also pieces of broomestic. It is said that tea-shirt was recovered from the place of occurrence and it was also kept under sealed cover.
(3.) FURTHER the case of the prosecution is that the appellant had all by himself surrendered in the court on 31.10.1975. The Investigating Officer had sent the report regarding getting the recovered articles examined by the Chemical Examiner. It may be mentioned here that there is no report from the chemical examiner to form view of the presence of the blood on the articles said to have been recovered at the spot. It is strange that in such matters the investigating agency relied upon the solitary testimony of the Investigating Officer about the said recovery of articles. It has been emphasised over and over again that reports of the chemical examiner and serologlst report must be produced. The officials concerned will do well to take note of this repeated observations so that the accused do not go un-punished and result in consequent forced acquittal for criminals. To complete chronology of the prosecution case, the statement of the appellant is said to have been recorded on 21.12.1975 and at the same time the I. O. is said to have forwarded a report to the Magistrate for getting the confession of the appellant recorded. After forwarding this report the Investigating Officer filed a charge-sheet against the appellant proved as Ext. Ka-14. It Is said that the actual recording of the judicial confession before the Magistrate, Orai. (P. W. 6) was done on 5.1.1976.;