Bombay High Court
Jaiprakash S/O Dajiba Janbandhu vs The State Of Maharashtra on 26 February, 2010
Author: P.D. Kode
Bench: A.P. Lavande, P.D. Kode
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 359 OF 2004
Jaiprakash s/o Dajiba Janbandhu,
Aged about 41 years,
Occupation - Skilled Job,
R/o. Neri, Tah. Chimur,
District - Chandrapur.
(At Present Central Jail,
Nagpur) .. APPELLANT
.. Versus ..
The State of Maharashtra,
Through P.S.O. Chimur,
District - Chandrapur. .. RESPONDENT
Mr. S.M. Bhangade, Advocate for Appellant,
Mr. J.B. Jaiswal, APP for Respondent.
.....
CORAM : A.P. LAVANDE & P.D. KODE, JJ.
DATE OF RESERVING THE JUDGMENT : JANUARY 14, 2010
DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE JUDGMENT : FEBRUARY 26, 2010
JUDGMENT ( per P.D. Kode, J.)
1. By present appeal, appellant has thrown challenge to judgment and order dated 16.3.2004 convicting him for committing murder of his wife Sau. Yashodhara and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- and i/d to suffer RI for 6 months passed by learned 3rd Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Chandrapur in Sessions Trial No. 81/2003 of the said Court.
::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 15:39:20 ::: 2Shantabai, sister of appellant i.e. accused no.3 and her husband Sayaji accused no.2 facing the said trial along with appellant were acquitted at the said trial.
2. The said trial has arisen out of chargesheet submitted by Police Station, Chimur in the Court of JMFC, Chimur against appellant, husband of his sister and sister as a result of investigation of FIR No.32/2003 dated 17.4.2003 registered with Chimur Police Station by PW8 PI Madavi for offence under Section 302 r/w 34 of IPC against appellant and said two accused on the basis of Occurrence No.59/2003 registered by him on same day at 10.45 hours with Out-Post Neri upon report Exh.30 given by PW2 Yashkumar Karade, brother of deceased Yashodhara, regarding her murder committed in between 1.30 to 2.00 hours in house of appellant at mouza Neri.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, as revealed from the record is as under :-
(a) Yashodhara, sister of PW2, was married with the appellant about 7 years prior to the incident and was living along with him at mouza Neri. The accused no.3 Shantabai - real sister of appellant and her husband accused no.2- Sahyaji were residing separately near house of the appellant.::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 15:39:20 ::: 3
(b) PW2 had reached Neri at about 10.30 hours on 17.4.2003 in view of appellant having intimated on phone at about 6.00 hours that his sister has strangulated and committed suicide.
PW2 had found at the house of appellant deceased Yashodhara with one end of saree loosely wrapped around her neck with knot and other end of saree on Ghadwanchi. He had also seen blood oozing from her nose and mouth and upon her head indicating herself having sustained head injury. He had also seen blood stains on wall with water poured on wall for cleaning and washing the same.
(c) On 13.4.2003 deceased along with the appellant had been to house of PW2 for naming ceremony of his son. The deceased had then told PW2 that appellant consumes liquor and always beat her without any reason. Similarly her sister-in-law accused no.3 residing near her house had also beaten her in the said month over petty reason. Accused no.2 armed with an axe had been to her house for beating her but had left due to door being closed. PW2 stating these matters had lodged report Exh.30 at out post Neri for necessary action on the count of appellant, acquitted accused nos.2 and 3 in collusion with each other, having committed murder of his sister and having created false scene of strangulation.
(d) PW8 PI Madavi, who on the said date had been out post Neri, had recorded report Exh.30 lodged by PW2 and registered occurrence as well as FIR Exh.60. During the course of investigation ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 15:39:20 ::: 4 in presence of panch PW7 Manohar, PI Madavi had drawn inquest panchanama Exh.54, spot panchanama Exh.55 and seized blood stained saree (Article B) and hairs found in the hands of deceased, wooden piece of door and blood found at the spot under seizure memo Exh.56. He had sent the corpse for post-mortem, arrested accused. He had drawn memorandum panchanama Exh.36 regarding statement leading to discovery made by the appellant and thereafter discovery panchanama Exh.37 and seizure memo Exh.38 in presence of panchs PW5 Manojkumar and PW6 Sanjay regarding seizure of pillow (Article A) effected from the house of the appellant.
The appellant had led panchas and police to the said place and taken out said pillow kept under mattress and clothes on tripod. In presence of same panch he also seized hairs of appellant & accused no.2 and blood sample of all the accused under seizure memo Exh.
52. He had forwarded seized muddemal property to Chemical Analyser under forwarding letter Exh.61. At the conclusion of the investigation he charge sheeted the appellant and the acquitted accused.
4. After committal of case to the Court of Sessions at Chandrapur, said trial was taken up by learned 3rd Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Chandrapur. The appellant vide his plea Exh.15 pleaded not guilty to charge Exh.14 framed on 2.9.2003.
::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 15:39:20 ::: 55. The prosecution at trial examined in all eight witnesses.
In addition to PW2, PW5 to PW8 referred herein above prosecution examined PW1 Dr. Dhote regarding postmortem examination of corpse of deceased made by him at Rural Hospital at Chimur and autopsy notes Exh.24 of the same prepared by him and the opinion of cause of death given by him. The prosecution also examined neighbours of the deceased i.e. PW3 Bakaram, who had firstly visited the spot of incident along with the accused and PW4 Ramesh, who had heard shouts of deceased few hours prior to her death. In addition to oral testimonies of said witnesses, prosecution also relied upon several documents referred hereinabove which were prepared during the course of investigation and the reports Exh. 45 to 49 received from Chemical Analyser regarding articles examined by him.
6. The defence of appellant at the trial, alike acquitted co-accused, was that of total denial and of false implication.
However appellant to certain questions put to him during examination under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. about circumstances appearing against him in the prosecution evidence admitted some of them being true but to the remaining circumstances/matters he claimed same being false and the witnesses having deposed falsely against him.
::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 15:39:20 ::: 67. The prosecution mainly relied upon the circumstantial evidence for establishing guilt of appellant i.e. the circumstances as found established from oral and documentary evidence adduced by prosecution at trial i.e
(i) deceased having died homicidal death,
(ii) appellant having unnecessarily carried a crow bar from house of PW3 Bakaram for creating a show of door of the room in the house of appellant being closed from inside by the deceased and, thereafter, herself having committed suicide,
(iii) there was quarrel in between appellant and deceased in the fateful night and thus reason to cause death of his wife,
(iv) in spite of wife of appellant being dead by 00.30 hours, appellant had not bothered to give information to the Police Patil or the Police at out-post Neri or at Chimur Police Station,
(v) acquitted accused no.2 had avoided to give such an information in spite of PW3 having told him to do so and on the contrary had avoided the same by telling that they (including appellant) were ready to face everything for the same,
(vi) appellant lately at 6.30 hours informed PW2 that his sister has committed suicide by hanging herself,
(vii) appellant till then had not bothered to inform the Police,
(viii) appellant had not given any explanation as to how dead body of deceased had reached up-till ground level,
(ix) appellant failed to give any explanation about hairs found in the hand of deceased, ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 15:39:20 ::: 7
(x) appellant was very much present in house in which the death of his wife had occurred in said night and failed to explain how she was found dead in a room and
(xi) no evidence had forthcome, of any third person other than appellant and acquitted accused, having entered said house prior to occurring death of deceased.
8. The Trial Court after assessment of evidence came to the conclusion of said ig circumstance being established by the prosecution. The trial court on the basis of the same came to further conclusion of same being sufficient to establish only the guilt of appellant for commission of offence of murder of deceased but not that of acquitted accused nos. 2 and 3 and hence convicted and sentenced the appellant, as stated earlier, but acquitted accused nos.2 and 3.
9. The learned counsel for the appellant in support of the appeal urged that :
a) circumstances relied by the prosecution are not clinchingly established by the evidence adduced.
b) even the said circumstances failed to point unerringly towards the guilt of the accused and/or the cumulative effect of the circumstances taken together fails to form a formidable chain so complete as to leave no escape for coming to the conclusion that within all human probabilities crime was committed by the appellant ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 15:39:20 ::: 8 and by none else,
c) PW2 was not eyewitness to the incident. He has reached the spot in the morning and thereafter lodged the report without making any inquiry with the neighbours. He had also not denied the defence of the appellant. He has also admitted the fact of door of room in which corpse was found being broken. His evidence thus fails to establish any circumstance including the motive for advancing the prosecution case,
d) the evidence of neighbour PW3 reveals that the door of room in which the deceased was sleeping could not be opened even after appellant pushed the same. The contradiction Exh.62 brought on the record reveals that he has made improvement at the time of trial and as such his evidence is liable to be discarded,
e) the evidence of another neighbour PW4 though reveals his claim of having heard altercation between appellant and deceased his failure to state reason for said quarrel creates grave doubt about his such a claim staked. In view of the same evidence of such unreliable witness who had deposed against the appellant due to enemity is liable to be discarded and as such his evidence is not useful to the prosecution to establish any circumstance against the appellant,
f) the evidence of panch witnesses PW 5 and PW 6 for memorandum panchanama Exh.36 and recovery panchanama Exh.
37 regarding alleged recovery of pillow article A at the behest of the appellant is in consequential in view of their evidence having failed ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 15:39:20 ::: 9 to reveal that memorandum was prepared at the behest of the appellant and/or the same were read over to the appellant and, thereafter, appellant had signed upon the same,
g) having due regard to prosecution case that blood was oozing from nose and mouth of the deceased, as deceased had died due to smothering by the soft article like pillow with throttling, failure of prosecution to send seized pillow to chemical analyser to establish that same was containing blood stains is fatal to prosecution. The same reduces recovery of pillow at the behest of appellant as inconsequential.
h) the evidence of panch PW7 for spot and inquest panchanama reveals that during the cross examination he has admitted that part of the door of said room was lying nearby. The same clearly reveals that appellant had opened door by means of crow bar. Thus evidence of PW7 creates grave doubt regarding the evidence of PW3 and 4,
i) the claim of PW8 of having seen bunch of hair in the left hand of deceased or nothing was attached to the ceiling/roof for hanging or his claim of having seen the hinges at the door of the room, being not supported by matters from spot panchanama/inquest panchanama clearly reveals the same being improvement made by witness. Hence his such a claim/evidence is liable to be discarded and consequently such circumstances cannot be said to have been established by the prosecution.
j) chemical analyser report being inconclusive regarding matching ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 15:39:20 ::: 10 of hairs of appellant, seizure of heirs in the hand of deceased creates doubt regarding prosecution case of appellant being perpetrator of the crime,
k) the prosecution evidence/circumstances having failed to established guilt of the appellant beyond pale of doubt, he deserves to be acquitted by giving benefit of doubt as mere suspicion cannot take place of legal proof.
10. The learned APP supported the impugned judgment and order and submitted that the evidence on record clearly establishes following circumstances i.e. :
a) the deceased having met with homicidal death, through the evidence of PW1 Doctor considered along with the other evidence regarding the situation in which the deceased was found dead in a room,
b) the evidence of PW8 clearly establishes that there was no provision made in a ceiling for hanging one self and the evidence of the other witnesses also not indicating any such facet considered in a manner in which the dead body was found in a room clearly rules out theory of deceased having committed suicide,
c) the same is also ruled out by the circumstance of body of the deceased being found lying on the ground with saree loosely around the neck with other part of saree on the tripod as established by the evidence of PW3 and PW7, ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 15:39:20 ::: 11
d) the fact of the witnesses PW3 having seen door being closed looses the significance in view of the evidence having established that hinges of the door were taken out,
e) the failure of appellant who is husband who claims having seen the body firstly along with PW3 to explain the said circumstances is a circumstance against the appellant as the same denotes his unnatural conduct.
f) the conduct of the appellant of not promptly lodging the report as revealed from the evidence of PW3 and on the contrary his conduct of making delay in informing Police also established by the said evidence is clearly a circumstance pointing towards his guilt having regard to the fact that death had occurred in his house.
g) the claim of appellant that he was sleeping separately on terrace along with a child is not only improbable but is blatantly false. His such a conduct would be also an circumstance against himself.
h) the fact of quarrel having occurred in between appellant and his wife at about 1 to 1.30 pm as established by the evidence of PW 4 being not denied by the appellant is sufficient to establish that the appellant was having motive for commission of crime. The evidence of said witness is not liable to be discarded merely on the fact that he was unable to give reason of quarrel as it will be futile to expect from any good neighbour to pay attention for such matter.
i) the fact of recovery of pillow at the behest of the appellant also supports the prosecution case and the said evidence ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 15:39:20 ::: 12 circumstance will not be liable to be discarded merely on the count of pillow being not sent to C.A.
j) the conduct of the appellant in propagating a theory of deceased having committed suicide is also a circumstance against the appellant,
11. The learned APP thus urged that considering the aforesaid established circumstances to the effect that the death had occurred in the house of the appellant, he had quarrel with his wife earlier, in intervening night soon prior to the death he had quarrel with his wife, his reluctance to promptly lodged the report, unplausible explanations and/or theory of suicide tried to be canvassed by him, undoubtedly leads to the legitimate inference of his guilt, as rightly drawn by the trial court in totality of the circumstances established.
Thus there are no merits in the appeal and the same deserves to be dismissed.
12. The learned APP, in support of his submission, also placed reliance upon the following decisions:
(i) The State of U.P. .vrs. Samman Dass, reported in AIR 1972 SC 677,
(ii) Rajammal and others .vrs. State by D.S.P. C.B. CID., Madras and others, reported in 1993 Cri.L.J. 3029,
(iii) Babu Raveendran .vrs. Babu Bahuleyan and another, reported in (2003) 7 SCC 37, ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 15:39:20 ::: 13
(iv) Dnyaneshwar .vrs. State of Maharashtra, reported in (2007) 10 SCC 445,
(v) Swamy Shraddananda alias Murali Manohar Mishra .vrs. State of Karnataka, reported in (2007) 12 SCC
288.
13. We have given thoughtful consideration to the submissions advanced by both the parties and carefully perused the record and the decisions relied.
14. At the out set it can be safely said that the prosecution case purely rests upon circumstantial evidence. Out of the circumstances relied by the prosecution, apart from the appellants having not disputed of deceased was found dead in a room in his house, the same is found established by the evidence of PW3, PW2 report filed by him at Exh.30, panch for inquest and spot PW7 and matters in inquest panchanama Exh.54 and spot panchanama Exh.
55. The said evidence clearly establishes the manner in which corpse of deceased was found in a room in the house of appellant with door initially closed, but could be opened by means of force from outside, the said room was not having any facility for hanging oneself to the roof, hairs were found in the hands of the deceased.
All the said facets considered along with the evidence of PW1 Dr. Dhote, who had performed autopsy upon the corpse of the deceased and opinion given by him in autopsy notes Exh.24 clearly establishes ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 15:39:20 ::: 14 deceased having met with homicidal death.
15. Such a conclusion is inevitable as the evidence of PW1 Dr. Dhote reveals that while doing autopsy during the external examination of the corpse of Yashodhara he had found her face was swollen, conjested, eye balls prominent, conjunctiva congested with tongue protruded outside, bluish in colour and oozing of blood from nostrils. He had also noticed her nail beds of bluish colour and neck portion above the clavical was swollen and congested.
ig PW1 on dissection amongst other had found larynx trachea and bronchi were found congested, larynx and trachea were fractured. He has also deposed that both lungs were severely congested and were exuding dark fluid blood upon dissection. He had also noticed both heart chambers were empty and large blood vessels were severely congested. He had found that the death of the deceased was caused due to asphyxia with several veins congested, due to smothering by soft article like pillow with throttling.
16. Upon scrutiny of his evidence the same is found well corroborated by the matters stated by him in autopsy notes Exh.24.
Similarly the same is also found corroborated by and large by the evidence of PW7 and inquest panchanama Exh.54 and so also supported by the evidence of PW 8 Investigating Officer. The scrutiny of his evidence does not reveal any significant matters being elicited during the cross examination except denial made by ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 15:39:20 ::: 15 him that trachea can be fractured in a case of hanging also and possibility of tongue not protruding in case of smothering only by means of pillow. It is significant to note that the appellant had not at all challenged the opinion given by PW1 i.e. cause of death being composite i.e. smothering with throttling. In view of the same only on the basis of the evidence of PW1 alone a conclusion would be warranted that the deceased had met with homicidal death. The same is obvious as the said opinion in terms exclude the other possibilities of death being either accidental or suicidal.
ig Needless to add the matters from other evidence are clearly suggestive of an violence with the deceased having taken place prior to succumbing to the death. It will not be out of place to state that cumulative effect of all the said evidence referred totally rules out the possibility deceased having committed suicide by hanging herself.
17. Now reverting to the moot question of the prosecution having established circumstances establishing guilt of appellant and in the said process considering the evidence relied by the prosecution; the scrutiny of the evidence of PW2 reveals that by and large he had given the evidence in consonance with the the prosecution case narrated hereinabove i.e. in consonance with the report Exh.30 lodged by him. His evidence amongst other clearly establishes the facet of deceased after her marriage residing with the appellant in his house, himself being informed by the appellant in the morning at about 6 hours on 17.4.2003 on phone of deceased ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 15:39:20 ::: 16 having died of hanging, himself having rushed to the spot of incident at Neri at about 10.30 a.m. , having noted the condition in which deceased was lying on ground with part of saree tied round her neck with knot, blood oozing from her mouth, one of her eye having swelling and blood stains on the wall seen wiped out. His evidence also reveals of his sister having told him on 15.4.2003 while she had been to his house at Nagpur that appellant used to beat her under the influence of drink.
18. The careful scrutiny of his evidence reveals that during cross-examination age of son of Yashodhara being 3 ½ years being brought on the record. It also reveals of of his claim of deceased having told him while returning to Neri of appellant beating her under the drink etc. being in nature of omission i.e. the matter not found in report Exh.30 by him and himself being unable to assign any reason for the same. Similarly during the same it was also brought on record that before he had been to the said room, the door of the room was broken. Beyond the aforesaid no significant material seems to have been brought out during his cross-
examination. Thus considering his evidence , it is difficult to accept that core of his testimony has been shattered during the cross-
examination. In the same context it will be necessary to add that even accepting the omission from his evidence brought on the record, no undue importance can be given to the same as the same is not in the nature of contradiction with any matter of otherwise ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 15:39:20 ::: 17 effect in his evidence. Thus the said evidence duly establishes facets of the appellant having failed to inform him up-till 6 O' clock about the death of his sister, having informed of herself having died due to hanging i.e. the matter which is not borne from the other evidence, and there used to be quarrels between appellant and deceased.
19. Now reference to the evidence of PW3 Bakaram reveals that he was residing near the house of the appellant and in the relevant night appellant had been to his house and had told him that his son was weeping for milk on the terrace and his wife was sleeping inside the house and the appellant having asked PW3 to come with him to wake her up. It further reveals that thereafter as told by PW3, appellant had been to his house and thereafter PW3 had been to the said house. It reveals that appellant had taken crow bar from house of PW3 without his knowledge. It reveals that as the door of the room in which the deceased was sleeping did not open after the same was pushed by the appellant, the appellant opened the door by means of crow bar from upper side and while doing so all the three hinges were found automatically removed. It is significant to note that his evidence reveals that door was not opened from the middle and two planks of the door were not separated and the door was opened from the side of hinges. His further part of evidence reveals the manner in which the deceased was found lying in the said room with one end of saree upon the ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 15:39:20 ::: 18 tripod (Ghadwanchi). It is significant to note that he had claimed of having gathered of Yashodhara being murdered. He has asked acquitted accused no.2 Sayaji who was present at the said house to lodge the report and thereon Sayaji having told him that report would be lodged in the morning and they would face whatever would happen. Sayaji also having told PW3 that he should not tell his name to anybody because he was Government servant. His evidence also discloses that accused no.3 used to beat Yashodhara and accused no.2 also having assaulted her with axe. He had also deposed of appellant used to beat Yashodhara under influence of drink.
20. The scrutiny of his evidence reveals that during the cross-
examination he had admitted of appellant having told him that deceased sleeping in the room was not opening the door. It reveals Appellant having also told him that after giving a call also she had not responded and when the door was hit by crow bar, the wood part of the plank was separated. Additionally a contradiction Exh.62 was brought on the record during the cross-examination of PW3 and the evidence of PW9 to the effect that "the appellant having told him that since wife was not opening the door, crow-bar from his courtyard was taken. Whether door should be opened by means of crow bar. PW3 should accompany him and thereon PW3 had gone along with him to his house".
::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 15:39:20 ::: 1921. Now considering the effect of all said answers elicited in cross-examination including contradictions, it is difficult to accept that due to same the core of testimony of PW3 can be said to have been shattered. Similarly careful consideration of the reasoning given by the trial Court of his evidence duly establishes relevant circumstances being established and/or the contradiction being brought on record being immaterial also do not show any flaw/any error committed by trial Court.
22. Now considering the evidence of PW3 in proper perspective and after taking into consideration the age of his son brought on the record through the evidence of PW2 being about 3½ years at the time of his evidence i.e. about three years at the time of incident; it is difficult to accept that claim staked by the appellant with PW3 that his son was weeping for milk on terrace and his wife was sleeping in the house. Needless to add that same clearly appears to be improbable. It is difficult to imagine that mother with child of such age would sleep separately on a terrace.
At any rate even accepting the said facet, it is further difficult to accept that even in such event also, the appellant would be required to go to the house of PW3 for the purposes as narrated by him to PW3 i.e. as established by the evidence of PW3.
23. In addition to the aforesaid, considering the evidence of PW3 in proper perspective, particularly about the manner in which ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 15:39:20 ::: 20 appellant had taken crow-bar without his knowledge, the manner in which the door was opened, hinges had remained inside the door clearly supports the reasoning given by the trial Court of the appellant having been to the house of PW3 for having a witness to see false scene created by him of death having occurred due to hanging in the house. Needless to add that possibility of deceased having committed suicide by hanging being totally ruled out by the other evidence, predominantly due to there being no provisions for hanging oneself in ig the said room, clearly establishes most unprobable conduct on part of appellant of staking such a claim.
Similarly taking into consideration further part of the evidence of PW3 which clearly denotes that till then or even thereafter no attempt was made by the appellant to inform the Police Patil, or Police at Out-post Neri or Chimur Police, is also clearly established from the said evidence, reveals further unnatural conduct on part of the appellant also justifying or fortifying the inference of his conduct of calling PW3 being unnatural. Thus it will be required to be concluded that all such circumstances are established by prosecution through the evidence of PW3.
24. Now considering the evidence of PW4 Ramesh and claim staked by him of having heard the quarrel in between the appellant and the deceased in the relevant night at about 9 p.m. is also found remained unshattered during the cross-examination. In the said context, there appears the substance in the submission of the ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 15:39:20 ::: 21 learned APP that merely because the said witness was unable to tell the reason behind the said quarrel, conclusion cannot be jumped that the evidence of the said witness is unreliable. Needless to add that the quarrels in between husband and wife being not an uncommon phenomenon merely because witness had not bothered to pay all attention for gathering cause about the same, would never be a good ground for discarding the said evidence. Thus the said evidence duly established the circumstance of the appellant in the crucial night having quarreled with his wife i.e. a circumstance indicative of he has a reason to commit crime or motive for the same.
25. Now considering the evidence of panch PW5 Manoj and PW6 Sanjay along with evidence of Investigating Officer PW8 PI Madavi, the same duly established that in pursuance of statement leading to discovery made by the appellant and recorded in memorandum panchanama Exh.36 pillow from Ghadvanchi in the house of appellant was seized by Police by recording discovery panchanama Exh.37. It is true that the said pillow was not sent by the Investigating Officer to the Chemical Analyser for examination.
However, merely because of the same, the said evidence cannot be said to be insignificant and/or being liable to be rejected. The same is obvious in light of opinion given by PW1 regarding the manner in which the death could have been said to have occurred i.e. by smothering by means of pillow. Having regard to the same, even ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 15:39:20 ::: 22 said evidence also to some extent assures truthfulness of the prosecution case.
26. Having considered the evidence mainly relied by the prosecution and the reasoning given by the trial Court thereon for arriving at conclusion that by the same the prosecution has established the circumstances mentioned hereinabove in the paragraph no.7 i.e. (i) deceased having died homicidal death,
(ii) appellant having unnecessarily carried a crow bar from house of PW3 Bakaram for creating a show of door of the room in the house of appellant being closed from inside by the deceased and, thereafter, herself having committed suicide, (iii) there was quarrel in between appellant and deceased in the fateful night and thus reason to cause death of his wife, (iv) in spite of wife of appellant being dead by 00.30 hours, appellant had not bothered to give information to the Police Patil or the Police at out-post Neri or at Chimur Police Station, (v) acquitted accused no.2 had avoided to give such an information in spite of PW3 having told him to do so and on the contrary had avoided the same by telling that they (including appellant) were ready to face everything for the same,
(vi) appellant lately at 6.30 hours informed PW2 that his sister has committed suicide by hanging herself, (vii) appellant till then had not bothered to inform the Police, (viii) appellant had not given any explanation as to how dead body of deceased had reached up-
till ground level, (ix) appellant failed to give any explanation about ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 15:39:20 ::: 23 hairs found in the hand of deceased, (x) appellant was very much present in house in which the death of his wife had occurred in said night and failed to explain how she was found dead in a room and
(xi) no evidence had forthcome, of any third person other than appellant and acquitted accused, having entered said house prior to occurring death of deceased. We find it difficult to find any fault in the said reasonings.
27. Now considering all these circumstances and particularly that appellant having failed to explain the same and particularly the circumstance of his inability to explain death of his wife occurred in the house and his unnatural conduct of not reporting the matter to the Police immediately and on the contrary his conduct of making false show of his wife having committed suicide by hanging, we are of considered opinion that the said circumstance has serious potential to form a formidable chain of circumstances pointing unerringly towards the sole inference of guilt of the appellant as being perpetrator of the crime. Needless to add that the said circumstance are compatible with the hypothesis of guilt of the appellant.
28. Since while considering the prosecution evidence, we have duly taken into consideration the law laid down by the Apex Court regarding circumstantial evidence as revealed from the decisions relied, we do not deem it necessary to make threadbare ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 15:39:20 ::: 24 dilation about each of the decision relied.
29. Having regard to the same, in our considered opinion the trial court had not committed any error in convicting and sentencing the appellant by the judgment and order which is challenged in the present appeal. Hence, we find no merit in the appeal and dismiss the same.
29. Appeal stands disposed of accordingly.
JUDGE JUDGE
::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 15:39:20 :::