M.R.CALLA,J. - (1.) THIS criminal appeal Under Section 374 Cr.P.C. is directed against the judgment and order dt. 9.6.93 passed by the Sessions Judge, Baran, in Sessions Case No. 80/92 whereby the appellant has been convicted Under Section 302 and 364 IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 200/ - Under Section 302 IPC and Under Section 364 IPC, he has . been sentenced to five years' R.I. and a fine of Rs. 100/ -, in default, he has been awarded three months' further R.I.
(2.) THE alleged incident is said to have taken place in the early hours of 10th May, 1992. A written report was lodged at Police Station Anta on 10.5.1992 being FIR No. 77/92 and on the said report, a case was registered Under Section 364 IPC. The written report which was lodged is Ex.P.7 and as per this report, the allegations are as under: Smt. Nirmala Bai wife of the accused appellant has stated in the report that she was married to the appellant Vinod Kumar about 10 -1.2 years back. Two years prior to the date of incident, a child was born to them who is named Nitesh. She has also stated that her husband had entered into a second marriage with Bhuli Bai of Rajapura and this marriage had taken place contrary to her (Nirmala Bai's) wishes and also contrary to the wishes of her father -in -law and the family members. Thereafter, her husband started living with Bhuli Bai at Anta in a rented house, while the son Nitesh and she herself were living with her father -in -law Devlal at Alipura itself. Her husband did not use to go to Alipura and they were not maintaining cordial relations and there used to be quarrel. On 5th May, 92 her father -in -law and other members of the family had gone to attend some marriage at Doongariaji and in their house at Alipura, Smt. Nirmala was there with her sister -in -law Chandrakala. Her husband came to Alipura on that day and told her that she should accompany him to Anta and they will live together there. She believed her husband and proceeded with him along with her son Nitesh to Anta where there used to be some exchange of words between Bhuli and her with an interval of 2 -3 days. On 9.5.92 at about 10 or 11 in the night, her husband, the present appellant, told her that he may drop her at her parental house and she along with Nitesh were carried in a Jeep from Anta for Laxmipura. It has been alleged that she was dropped out from the Jeep between her village and Baran and the appellant Vinod Kumar returned with Nilesh. When she told that why she was being dropped our and where the child Nitesh was being taken, he told that this only would clear your and my way. There from, she reached her parental home and narrated the whole story to her mother. On 10.5.1992, at about 8 O'clock, she came to Anta along with her mother form Laxmipura and found that her husband and her son were not available in the house where they were living. She sent information to hex father -in -law at Alipura, and she has also stated that she suspected that her husband Vinod Kumar might have killed her son. Upon this report, a case Under Section 364 IPC was registered and at abut 2 p.m. the present appellant was arrested as per the arrest memo (Ex.P.10). Ex.P.11 is the information given out by the appellant Under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, which shows that he had thrown his son in Kalisindh river near the bridge of the Railway line and thereafter, the body of the child was recovered from the river Kali Sindh. The post mortem report is Ex.P.6 and in the opinion of the doctor, the cause of death is asphyxia as a result of drawing. Thereafter, the case was registered Under Section 302 IPC also. The statement of the witnesses were recorded Under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and after completion of the investigation, challan was filed.
(3.) THE accused appellant has faced the trial for the offenses Under Section 302 and 364 IPC. The prosecution examined ten witnesses and thereafter, the statement of the accused appellant was recorded Under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and two witnesses have been examined in defence.;