SOBHAG MAL JAIN, J. - (1.) THE appellant stands convicted and sentenced under Section 302 IPC to imprisonment for life for committing the murder of his wife Smt. Sukhi.
(2.) THE prosecution case, in brief, was that on the night of January 1, 1980, the accused and his wife Smt. Sukhi had gone to sleep in Jhumpa (hut) in the Gawari of his parents as usual. In the morning, the following day i.e. January 2, 1980, they were found missing. Several persons, including Deepa Ram and Surja Ram were sent in search for them. Deepa Ram and Surja Ram, came to Jodhpur and found the accused there at the railway station. They enquired the accused about the where abouts of his wife. The accused told them that she was at the house of her parents. They brought the accused to their village Bhewra. His parents and other people from the village were present. The accused was again asked as to where he had taken his wife. He then confessed that he had killed her and thrown her body in the well of Shiv Narain Purohit. On this, the Sarpanch Jai Narain, Ward Panch Pratap Singh and others went to Shiv Narain's well and peeped in the well. They saw a Gathdi in the well. A report was drawn by the Secretary, Gram Panchayat and was sent to the police station through Sunder Ram who presented it at the police station, Osian at about 3.30 p.m. on January 3, 1980. A case under Section 302 IPC was registered against the accused and investigation started. The Investigating Officer went to the well of Shiv Narain Purohit and recovered a Gathdi from there. It contained a dead body which was identified to be of Smt. Sukhi. Dr. Tarachand was called at the spot, who performed the post mortem examination of the dead body and found several ante -mortem injuries on the body. He opined that the cause of death of Smt. Sukhi was asphyxia due to somthering. The Investigating Officer arrested the accused and recovered a knife on the information and at the instance of the accused. He also recovered a silver ingot at his instance. 'The hut, where the accused and his wife had slept together was also inspected by the Investigating Officer and a cot and a 'rali' were seized which on chemical examination were found stained with blood. After investigation a charge -sheet against the accused was filed challan in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jodhpur, who committed him to the Court of Sessions for trial under Section 302 IPC. The learned Sessions Judge framed a charge against the accused under Section 302 IPC and recorded his plea. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. As many as 18 witnesses were examined by the prosecution in support of its case. There being no direct evidence, the case against the accused was based on circumstantial evidence and the extrajudicial confession alleged to have been made by him. In his statement, recorded under Sections 313 Cr.PC the accused denied the prosecution allegations and claimed that he was innocent and had been falsely implicated at the instance of his father, who was annoyed with him.
(3.) BY the judgment, dated 31st July, 1980 the Sessions Judge, Jodhpur, has convicted and sentenced the appellant under Section 302 IPC to imprisonment for life. The learned Sessions Judge has held the following circumstances proved against the accused: (1) The accused and the victim Smt. Sukhi went as usual to sleep in their Jhumpa in the night of 1 -1 -80. Both of them were found missing in the next morning; (2) The accused was found at Jodhpur and he gave false explanations that his wife had gone to her parents, or that she was at village Bhewra; and; (3) The accused made extra -judicial confession in the night of 2 -1 -80 and in the morning of 3 -1 -80. It was on the basis of the information furnished by him extra -judicial confession that the dead body of his wife Smt. Sukhi was found in the Bera of Shiv Narain Purohit. Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment, the appellant has filed this appeal through jail. As the accused was unrepresented, Shri Suresh Kumbhat was appointed as Amicus Curiae to argue the case on his behalf. Shri Kumbhat has appeared and argued the appeal on behalf of the accused.;