The whole cose rests oh the vs Those circumsl

We have heard Shri Bl [laskar Pyasi, counsel for the appellant and Shri Sudhir Bajpcti/ by. (yovt. Advocote for the State. 8) Shri Pyasj, leGrned coUrisel for the accused/Gpoeiiant, has ndt disDuted the homicidal deoh-h of Begum Bano. Moreover, Dr. S. Chandravanshi (PW-6)/who cc^ducted postmortem on the body of Begum Bsno, has s+Qted that 8th<& 13 ribs were cut in the size of 3 cm. x 1 cm. There was a stab wound4n th< iiver in the size of 3 cm x 0.5 cm< x 2 cm. The cause of death was rapjt'u ire of liver and cardiopulmonary faiiure. beath was homicidal in naturl ur^. In view of above medical evidence, it is established that the death ofl !Begum Bano wos homicidal in nature. XI- 75ST ^IHI^, ^Tfl-trt^Ko, [s)01'M^< 0 *<l*ldl **<l<b •^ 200 anipff'q^3F (yiI^qcT) STT^T^T'ft^F ^TT^T 3?T^T 5h+ll<=ft ^RITW^feT-STT^T cbl^id^l^ ^i*i<?ff'^,'fe^ <Pn^i< ^^rRpT^Frr^T 9) As far as complicity )f the accused/appellant in the crime in question is concerned, in thi^ case there is no direct or ocubr evidence< The whole cose rests oh the ircumstantia) evidence. As per th€ settied bw in order to convict an ac< used based on the circumstGntial eyidence, the Hon'ble Apex Court t-he matter of Dhananjoy Chat)B@rje@ Vs. Stat®of W.B. (1994) 2 SC| 220 held that: bas^d ITn a case circumstances f to be drawn hai but also that ai shouid be of a a with the hypotl Those circumsl being expiained guilt of the aca must be so com! ground for the of the accused. established jndignation of conviction and greater should evidence lest su; on circumstantial evidence, 'om which the conciusion of guiit is ^e not only to be fuily estGbiished the circumstances so estabiished ^nciusive nature arid consistent oniy sBSIS OT TH€ yujlT^ OT in€- uCCUS^u* h|xnces should not be capabie of >yGny other hypothesis except the tsed and the chain of the evidence lete GS not to leave any reasonable i^cumstances dief consistent with the innocence It needs no reminder that legaiiy not merely ifie court can form the basis of fhe more serious the crime, the care taken to scr'utinize the Ipicion takes the piace of proof," 10) In the present case, 8<ibu ftao (PW-1), before whom the accused said to have made extra jud ^ial confession, has turned hostile ond hos not suppofted the prosecutic ^ case. Similarly, the witnesses who were XI-HC—78 ^ 3:5^'^TPTT^T, yiTn-y<i<o,(s«y'>l^^< ^l^dl **<|cb "^ 200 3HiST XpT^ (^c([^<{tST) ^T^T^T f<TlJch 1cT^T ^TT^T 5li*li<=t) <i '^nw^f^T3?n^T CM<4f<n<I1i ^i*i<^ ^fe^t <Fs|^K ^stfiw^n^r called on the spot namely, PjW-2 Satibai Chandrakar, PW-3 kajbati & PiW- PW-4 Meena Begum/ mother 4 c|f the accused, have also turned hostile and they have not supported the ^rosecution case. But the fact remains that as per the evidence of PW-1 pabu Kao, the first psrson who reached on the spot, he has stated thal the accused and his wife used to reside together in the house where jthe body of Begum Bano wos found. It is also established from his evNbnce that th^ accused was found in the weli of his house« Hecirina the cbmwotion in the vicinitv, he went towards that side, he saw that the ac^ ^used was in the well and he was pulted out from the well with the h4 |lp of rope. This witness has not been cross-examined. 11) PW-2 Satibai Chandral<|ar ', has not supported the prosecution case fully, but she has stated thap" on the fateful doy on heoring commotion number of persons coltected jn the house of the accused, they saw that the accused was lying in the JA/eil and they puiled out hirp from the wett. PW-3 Rajbati hds simply sta^ S-ed that the mother of the accused came and said that her son has Jun^pe jun^ed into the wjell. This witness has also not been cross-examined. 12) PW-4 Meena Beoum, mbther of the cccused has also stated that she heard the voice of her feon l.e. accused "save saveii from the well. XI-HS 3^ST ^l^l^^l, ^•y'Ko, i«t01^y ^Wv[[ <kNlcb ^ 200 3n^?r XPRF (^dl^^) 3TT^T ^ f<Tli<=h J^SH .3H^[ $b*iich ^^II^R ^lia 13TI^T cbl^lid^l'1 'RPraf ^Fs^ <Rn^$i< ^3ffip73?n^T Thereafter she called the p^rsons who were residing in the adjoining houses. In the meantime, ^ajmati A others came and pulled out the accused from the well 13) Therefore, from the a| ?ove evidence it Js established that on the fatefut day the accused w4s w4s in the well, his mother informed the neighbours, they came and pu |led out him from the well. The accused has not stated that how he felt the well. As per the evidence of PW-6 Dr, S. Chandravanshi, who cor |ducted postmortem on the body of Begum Bono, there were stab injurie:| on the body of the deceased ond she died on account of hole in the It/er. The accused has not stated in his statement recorded under S^tion 313 of the CrP.C* or the prosecution witnesses have not been crc|ss-exGmined on any aspect that how the deceased Begum Bano sustain^ sd the homicidal injuries. The accused was found in the well, but he has stated that how he fetl in the weil. 14) Coupled with these pro^ (ed facts, we have scrutinized the evidence of PW-9 Sheikh Rahim, brothi ^.r of the deceased & brother-in-bw of the accused. He hos stated tha cbout 10 years prior to the date of his evidence his sister was man lied with the accused. Accused used to harass and subject his siste ^ to cruelty on the ground of demand of money. He used to give b^atin9 to Begum Bano. He per-suaded the T^SS '^w\^^, ^xn'M'Ko, (si<v>i'y^< ^Wvt{ 5b*41«b "^ 200 CT^T-q^? (lic<^<^) 3Tlt^T ;FT f<Tl[<=h ^^T 3?TT^T sr)+ii<=n '^RITW^rf^T ^TT^T cbl^id^l'1 HW^K ^^S <Rnt$*< ^3?fRiH3n^T accused & his sister not to| quarrel and on his advice, the accused took his sister to his residenci He gave one house to the accused for residence and also gaye mon^ ^y to him to do his own business. ThereQfter he started the business of glass bangles. He did that business 2-4 months, thereafter he ctos^ td the same and came to Mahasamund. He used to give beating .to his sister. This witness has not been cross-examined on this a$pex<| 15) Therefore, from th above evidence of the witnesses, established that: > The accused usl used to give > The body of was lying in td to harass, subject to cruelty and be(|iting to Begum Bano. ^egum Bono with homicjdal injuries the |h6use of the accused, > The accused w< cries oniy the |is olso found in the well and on his r|eighbours puiied put him from the weii, 16) The accused has not o^ |fered any explanation that how Begum Bcxno sustoined homicidGl injuries o^d how he fell down in the wel! whereas, the CGSC of the prosecution is |hat on the fateful day there was quarrei between the two, The accu^ sd first pressed the neck of the deceased and thereafter attacked hei with sickle. Considering his wife dead he himself jymped into the we in order to commit suicide* There is no XI-H^3»^.fe /t~^\ 1 TSSf ^Nt^q, ^Tfi'^Ko, (<(01-y^< ^IINdl *Nlcb "V^ 200 3^?T TR^F (^clf^^) 3TI^T?RT fqilon 'cW^TT^T sh^Jcb '^iTW^rf^r 3?n^r <^>l€<(<yt<I1l 'W^Tf ^f,fe^ <P»t^l< ^3ifOT^n^r c explanation from the accilsed on these proved facts, therefore, complicity of the accused in +he crime in question and thereafter jumped into wett in order to commit stjicide i$ established, 17) Learned counsel for th^ accused/appeilant submitted that there is nothing on record that the a<|:cused attacked the deceased with intention to cause her death. Even 4 \1 prosecution case, there use^ ickle has not been recovered. As per the be some quarret, the accused used to give beating to the deceased on account of dispute between the two, the financiat condition of laccused was not welland under circumstGnces the accused m| Ight have given beating to the deceased ond Jumped into the well to commit suicide, therefore, offence against the ciccused does n|ot travei beyond Section 304 Part-II of the IPC. 18) On the other hand, le^rned counsel for the State supported the Judgment of the trial Court. 19) In the present case, as has been mentioned eartier, all witnesses have tumed hostil il^, but there are provedcircumstances and based on that inference can i Ibe drawn that the accused was the author of the crime in question, It Ihas also come on record that the financiol condition^ of the accused w{ss not well, therefore, there used to be XI-He—7S '^®gj^ ^^ ^, ^. 1 |, J 'w 3:c^T •^TPTT^T, ^>Tfl^4l<o, (sx'il'yy 10 -sasis^ WERTT (b*4|cb ^ "^ 200 an^r'q^ep (^t^^) ^TI^T y[ fqiicn ^SHW^T sib^lJcb '^ITW^f^T^TT^T <=bi^f<n<iiti 1RTT^ff ^f,fe(3t <RI^I< "^^TRw^n^T quarrel between the husboj id and wife. It appears that out of frustration the accused migtjit have ottacked his wife and thereafter Jumped into the weli in order ro commit suicide feeling guilty, Under the cir'cumstances, intention to death of his wife nGmety, Begum Bano cannot be attributed to the! accused. Further, from this fact it con safely be inferred that the < \ which he cttocked Beoum ccu^ed had knowiedge thot the manner in tano he mGvlikeiy to cause her d&ath. Therefore, offence under Se< :tion 304 Part-II of the IPC is estabiished and conviction and sentence imposed under Section 302 of the IPC cannot be maintained, 20) In the result, the appe^l partly succeeds. Conviction and sentence imposed upon the accused/ap^ellant under Section 302 of the IPC are set aside; instead thereof he| |is convicted under Section 304 Part-II of the IPC and sentenced to u^ ^idergo RJ. for 10 years. Conviction and sentence under Section 309 o1 f the IPC are maintained. It is stated that the accused is in detention s^ce 17-7-2001 til! today. The accused shaii be entitled for set off of the above detention period agcinst sentence imposed upon him. Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge %^ Sd/- T.P.Sharma Judge