ATUL KUMAR JAIN, J. - (1.) ACCUSED Ram Lal was convicted on 25.8.2007 in Sessions case No.20/2006 relating to FIR No.171/2006 of Police Station, Raisingnagar by Additional Session Judge, Raisingnagar District Sriganganagar under section 302 Indian Penal Code for causing murder of his wife. He was sentenced under section 302 IPC by the said court by life imprisonment along with a fine of Rs.5000/ - and in default of payment of fine, an additional simple imprisonment of one year was also ordered by the trial court. In this appeal, it has been argued on behalf of the accused -appellant Ram Lal that the judgment of the trial court is against the facts as well as against law, the trial court has not appreciated evidence properly, the trial court has relied upon the interested and relative witnesses of the prosecution side, there are material contradictions in the statement of the sole eye witness Smt. Soma Devi who was sister of the deceased Sita Devi, 'Kassi' by which injuries are alleged to have been caused was not shown to the doctor during her statement by the prosecution, and that there was no cause to disbelieve testimony of parents of the accused -appellant who were admittedly present on the spot.
(2.) ON the other hand, it has been argued on behalf of the respondent i.e. the State of Rajasthan that the case was proved beyond doubt in the trial court and real brother of the accused -appellant and wife of his brother have given testimony against the accused -appellant and there is no cause to disbelieve them. It has also been argued that the parents of the accused -appellant were highly interested in the welfare of their son so they have been declared hostile in the trial court. It has also been argued that soon after the incident, the accused -appellant had tried to run away along with the weapon of the offence but he was taken by his own brother to the police and this fact also goes against the accused -appellant. It has further been argued that the accused -appellant has taken an improbable defence story which has not been substantiated by him at all. In the light of arguments raised by both the sides, we have perused the record of the case. Here summary discussion of the evidence led by the parties in the case will be helpful to reach correct conclusion in this case.
(3.) SMT . Soma Devi, PW4 is real sister of the deceased Sita Devi. Both had been married in the same family with two real brothers. Smt. Sita Devi was married to accused - appellant Ram Lal while Smt. Soma Devi was married to Tulsa Ram who is the younger brother of accused - appellant Ram Lal. Smt. Sita Devi is having two children also. Both the brothers used to live in the same 'Dhani' but in different portions. Smt. Soma Devi states that the accused -appellant Ram Lal often used to quarrel with Smt. Sita Devi and he used to beat her. She further states that in the night when Smt. Sita Devi was killed in the early hours of morning, the accused -appellant started to quarrel and beat his wife Sita Devi in night also. She further states that parents of accused -appellant Ram Lal and her husband Tulsa Ram tried to persuade the accused - appellant not to beat his wife and because of their persuasion, Ram Lal went to the bed. At about 4:00 A.M., again she awoke because of cries of her sister and all the family members rushed to the spot to find that Ram Lal had attacked with the help of a 'Kassi' on the neck of his wife Smt. Sita Devi causing blood to ooze out from her neck. She states that they immediately rushed with Smt. Sita Devi to the hospital but the doctor told them that Smt. Sita Devi has expired. In the cross examination, Smt. Soma Devi, PW4 has not deviated at all from her examination in chief. She is fully trustworthy witness. ;