- (1.) BHAWANI Prasad has preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 29th March, 1986 of Sri Kazi Khurshed Ahmad, Special Judge/ad ditional Sessions Judge, Gonda convicting and sentencing the appellant under Sec tion 3021. P. C. to imprisonment for life.
(2.) THE prosecution case is that the house of informant Abhimanu Kumar is in Mohalla Bhagwatiganj, Balrampur which was previously in the district of Gonda. THE appellant' was tenant in one of the rooms of the house of the informant and he used to reside there along with his wife, one daughter and one son. THE first wife of the appellant had earlier died leaving be hind two sons, but two sons from the pre vious wife of the appellant used to reside in their ancestral house as they were having strained relations with appellant who had taken a second wife. Informant Abhimanyu Kumar used to go for Jajmani and on the fateful day when he returned from Jajmani and was taking dinner at about 9. 00 - 10. 00 p. m. he heard some shouts of the wife of the appellant. He reached the room of the appellant and found that the appellant was delivering blows with a sickle to his wife and was hurling abuses. THE informant tried to intervene but in vain. THE informant thereafter rushed to police out-post Bhagwatiganj where he narrated the incident to the Head Constable. When the policemen accompanied with the in formant came to the room of the appellant, they found that the wife of the appellant and his son were ling dead on the cot. The appellant was also lying on the same cot and was under the influence of intoxication. The prosecution case is that the appellant could not pull on well with his wife and therefore, he killed her. The F. I. R. was lodged on the same day, i. e. 7-10-1985 at about 11. 30 p. m. and a case was registered against the appellant. The police sent the bodies for post-mortem examination and the appellant who was found there was also sent for medical ex amination. Injury report Ext. Ka-22 shows that two injuries were found on the person of the appellant. One was lacerated wound on the chin while the other was abrasion of the left side of head. The appellant was found to be under influence of liquor. The post- mortem examination of Smt. Kishore Devi, wife of the appellant, reveals twelve injuries on her person which were incised wounds. On the body of Rajesh too there were nine incised wounds. After completion of investigation, the appellant was charge-sheeted that in due course the case was committed to the Court of Session. At the trial the appellant pleaded not guilty, but the learned Sessions Judge believed the prosecution evidence and convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned above. The appellant has now come up in appeal to this Court.
(3.) WE have heard Sri R. K. Dwivedi, learned counsel for the appellant and thee learned Government Advocate. WE have also perused the evidence on record of the case. In support of his case the prosecu tion examined in all seven witnesses. P. W. 1 Abhimanu Kumar is the informant. He was the key stone of the prosecution case, but he has not supported the prosecution case and was declared hostile. P. W 7 is Dr. U. C. Dwivedi who conducted the post-mor tem examination and rest of the prosecution witnesses were formal in nature.;