Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(C) That the accused and the deceased were last seen together at Rajkot on the previous day, i.e., on 14th March, 1985.

(D) That the deceased and the accused were together in the house of the accused, situated at No. 9, Sterling Centre, Khanpur, Ahmedabad, during the night between 14th and 15th March, 1985.

(E) That the accused was found to be having certain injuries which could have been caused by human bite and human nails on his person, when he was arrested.

(F) That the conduct of the appellant-accused from 6-00 a.m. onwards on 15th March, 1985, was unnatural and was not that of an innocent husband who had lost his wife all of a sudden.

15. The fifth circumstance enlisted at Serial No. E is in respect of the injuries allegedly sustained by the appellant-accused while committing the ghastly murder of the victim-Sarojben Soni. The prosecution has placed reliance upon the evidence of Dr. Jain, P.W. No. 14, Exh. 40. Dr. Jain has stated that on 16th March, 1985, just after midnight, the appellant-accused was brought to him by the police and he had examined the appellant-accused and they had prepared the case papers and had noticed four abrasions on the person of the appellant-accused and the history given by the appellant-accused was of human bite. The evidence, tendered by Dr. Jain at Exh. 40, is sought to be utilised, by the prosecution, in the best available manner by urging that all the abovesaid four injuries which were again possible by human bite or by human nails, could have been caused to the appellant-accused during the scuffle when he had tried and that too successfully to throttle his wife. But, this aspect of the case requires a further consideration in the light of the evidence tendered by Dr. Jain during the cross-examination because, he has stated that he is not sure as to whether the abovesaid four injuries were possible by human bite. He had also admitted that the Registrar of the Hospital has also not given any definite opinion in this respect. It is his further say that the age of the injuries also could not be definitely deposed by him. Lastly, it is his say that these injuries might be possible by coming into contact with any hard, blunt or rough substance. Mr. Dave, learned A.P.P., has tried to urge that Dr. Jain only says that the abovesaid injuries which are possible by human bite or human nail were also possible by coming into contact with hard and blunt substance. But, it appears very clearly that if the evidence of Dr. Jain is to be read in the abovesaid manner, we are not reading the middle portion of his say, where he says very clearly that he was not sure as to whether these injuries were possible by human bite. He has also stated that even the Registrar, attached to the unit, has also not given any definite opinion in this respect. It, therefore, becomes clear that the abovesaid circumstances in respect of certain injuries possibly by human bite or human nails on the person of the appellant-accused is not established.