- (1.) THE present appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 23/09/1991 passed by the
(2.) ND Additional Sessions Judge, Godda in Sessions Case No. 74/1991, whereby the appellant, who was tried for committing the murder of his wife Smt. Kanti Devi and causing disappearance of evidence of the offence, has been found guilty and, thereby, has been convicted for committing the offence under Sections 302 and 201 IPC and, has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for life for the offence under Section 302 IPC and further to undergo R.I. for a period of five years for the offence under Section 201 IPC. 2 The facts, in short giving rise to this appeal, are that the informant Mahadeo Mandal lodged a Fardbeyan before Kahalgaon Police Station in the district of Bhagalpur on 06/10/1990 alleging therein that he got his daughter Kanti Devi married to the appellant Umakant Mandal, a resident of Village Dhalkudia, P.S. Belbadda, district Godda and Kanti Devi had a son aged about 3 -4 years. When she was pregnant, she had promised to offer sacrifice (Bali) of a hegoat, which her husband was not in a position to arrange and, therefore, she requested her father, i.e. the informant to arrange for a he -goat. The informant, as per the wishes of his daughter, arranged a he -goat for the said purpose. On 03/10/1990 at about 10.00 A.M. the appellant Umakant Mandal came to the house of the informant in village Singhari in order to take the he -goat and while returning to his village he asked the informant that no one should come to his village. On 05/10/1990, the informant sent his son Raghunath Mandal to the house of the appellant in order to know "Haal - Chaal" (welfare) of his daughter. His son Raghunath returned on the same day in the afternoon and told him that his sister Kanti Devi was not there in her Sasural and on being asked, her in -laws did not give any satisfactory reply. He also disclosed that the appellant was also not found in the village. Thereafter, the informant's son tried to get information about his sister from the cousins of the appellant but they also avoided to give any reply, however he came to know that on 03/10/1990, in the evening, the appellant by holding the hairs of his wife Kanti Devi brought her dragging to the bridge over Dhulia river and there with the help of other persons present there, killed his wife Kanti Devi and, thereafter, threw her dead body in Dhulia river. Raghunath tried to trace out the dead body of her sister near the bridge and in the river but he could not trace out the same. On receipt of such information, the informant alongwith 4 -5 other villagers went to the in - laws place of his daughter in village Dhalkudia but no one from the appellant's family were found there and, thereafter, he started searching the dead body of his daughter in the river and ultimately, he could locate her dead body near "Kaua Pool" situated at Kahalgaon. Since the dead body was found at Kahalgaon, which fell within the territory of the district of Bhagalpur and, therefore, Kahalgaon Police recorded the Fardbeyan of the Informant, prepared the inquest report and, thereafter, sent the dead body of Kanti Devi for postmortem examination to Bhagalpur. However, when Kahalgaon police felt that, in fact, the offence was committed within the territorial jurisdiction of the district of Godda then the Fardbeyan of the informant was sent to Mehrama Police Station for further action and investigation into the case. On completion of investigation the police submitted charge sheet under Section 302 and 201 IPC against the appellant. On the basis of which, cognizance was taken, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions where charges were framed against the appellant, which he denied and, thereafter, he was put on trial. The whole case is based on the circumstantial evidence since there is no eyewitness to the occurrence.
(3.) THE learned trial court on the basis of the evidence adduced by the prosecution held that the following circumstances appeared from which it was established that it was the appellant, who committed the murder of his wife Kanti Devi and, thereafter, threw her dead body in the river: - (i) On the date of occurrence in the morning the appellant was very much annoyed with his wife and he had beaten her due to which his wife fled away from his house and took shelter in the house of her aunt (Mausi PW -2). (ii) The appellant became angry and had altercation also with PW -2 and PW -4 as to why his wife took shelter in their house and, thereafter, he took back his wife Kanti Devi. PW - 2 stated that Kanti Devi had disclosed to her that she was beaten up by the appellant. (iii) PW -12 stated that about one year back while he was returning after grazing his cattle, he saw the appellant going with his wife and eight days thereafter, the dead body of the appellant's wife was found near "Kaua Pool". ;