LAWS(MPH)-1954-11-4

RAGHUWAR SINGH Vs. THE STATE

Decided On November 12, 1954
Raghuwar Singh Appellant
V/S
THE STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant Raghuwar Singh was tried by the Sessions Judge of Gwalior on the charge of murdering his sister -in -law Mst. Amritju. At the end of the trial the learned Judge agreeing with the opinion of the assessors found the appellant guilty under S. 302, I. P. C., and sentenced him to transportation for life. The accused has now appealed to this Court against the conviction and sentence.

(2.) THE case for the prosecution was that the appellant and his sister -in -law used to live in one house but messed separately; that in this state of living when Amritju became 'enceinte', she told some people that she and the appellant Raghuwar Singh had been living together. Raghuwar Singh resented the suggestion of Amritju that he had illegal intimacy with her. He, therefore claimed before the Panchas that he had nothing to do with the pregnancy of the deceased Amritju and asked them to determine the truth about the matter. A Panchayat was held on 6 -4 -1952 and the Panchas on inquiry learnt from Amritju that Raghuwar Singh was the father of the expected child. The Panchas, therefore, asked Raghuwar Singh to swear at the next meeting of the Panchayat that he had no connection whatsoever with Amritju.

(3.) THE argument of Mr. De, learned counsel for the appellant, was that the conviction of the appellant was based solely on his statement before the Committing Magistrate inasmuch as the learned Sessions Judge was not prepared to believe the eye witnesses Doma and Gyasia or accept the evidence of Pyareraja and Durag Singh unless it was corroborated and that the confession Ex. P. 12 and the statement of the accused before the Committing Magistrate could not be held as evidence corroborating the evidence of the witnesses Doma, Gyasia, Pyareraja and Durga Singh. It was further said that the confession Ex. P. 12 and the statement made by the accused before the committing Magistrate were not voluntary as they were given by the accused on account of police pressure and ill -treatment by the police.