- (1.) These are two appeals directed against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar dated May, 8, 1976 by which accused Ramja was convicted under Section 302, IPC and was sentenced to imprisonment for life.
(2.) At about 5.00 p.m. on December 30, 1975, the accused appeared at Police Out Post, Lalgarh before the Head Constable Hardeva Ram (PW 8) and stated before him that he had killed his wife Smt. Laxmi, aged about 25 years in the noon of that very day in his house. The Head Constable recorded his statement Ex. P 10. It appeared from his statement that he had committed the murder of his wife. He, therefore, took the accused along with his statement Ex. P 10 to Police Station, Chunawadh. The Station House Officer registered a case under Section 302 IPC treating Ex. P 10 as the First Information Report. The SHO Nathu Ram (PW 9) arrived at the house of the accused and on opening it found the dead body of Smt. Laxmi lying therein. He prepared-the inquest report of the dead body and the site plan. The post-mortem examination of the victim's dead body was conducted on December 31, 1975 by PW 10 Dr. S.S. Buxi the then Medical Jurist, Government Hospital, Ganganagar. The doctor noticed the following injury on the victim's dead body: Multiple contusions dark bluish red in colour on both the buttocks, both thighs and both legs posteriorly and anteriorly. The doctor was of the opinion that the cause of death was shock due to multiple injuries. On the completion of investigation, the police submitted a challan against the accused in the Court of Additional Munsif & Judicial Magistrate, Sri Ganganagar, who, in his turn, committed the case for trial to the Court of Sessions. The learned Sessions Judge framed a charge under Section 302, IPC against the accused, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. In support of its case, the prosecution examined ten witnesses and filed some documents. In defence, the accused adduced no evidence. On the conclusion of trial, the learned Sessions Judge found the accused guilty of the offence he was charged with. The accused was consequently convicted and sentenced as mentioned it the very out-set. Aggrieved against his conviction, the accused has taken these appeals.
(3.) Before proceeding further, it may be pointed out that the learned Sessions Judge excluded the First Information Report (Ex.P 10) from consideration as it amounted to a confession of the accused. However, he accepted the testimony of PW 4 Ratna Ram before whom the accused is alleged to have made the extra-judicial confession. He further took into consideration the fact of the recovery of the victim's dead body in the accused's house in consequence of the information furnished by him.;