Judgment

CHANDRACHUD, J.:- The appellant who has many aliases, was charged before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, with offences under Sections 302 and 209 of the Penal Code for committing the murder of one Indira Joshi and then taking a poisonous insecticide in a bid to commit suicide. The trial Court convicted the appellant of both the offences and sentenced him to death for the offence of murder. The High Court having confirmed that judgement, the appellant has filed this appeal by special leave of this Court.

2. The circumstantial evidence in support of the charges for which the appellant has been convicted is of the clearest kind. The deceased Indira, a young widow developed friendship with the appellant after the death of her husband. They lived together for a few months and later the appellant shifted to another room for securing which the deceased pledged her ornaments with a moneylender. Separate residence meant separate interests and the appellant feared that he was being jilted. He resented that the deceased should go to cinema houses in the company of others in preference to him.

3. At about 11 a.m. on May 3, 1971 the deceased went to the appellant s room in the company of her 10 years old son, Shashikant, who had some difficulty in getting admission to one of the better known schools in Bombay. The appellant was taking his bath and he was apparently so saturated with his grievances against the deceased that when she asked him if he could help secure admission for the boy in the particular school, he hurled a bathroom pot at her. The deceased then asked the appellant to return her moneys. He finished his bath had a change of clothes and asked her as to why she liked to go to picture houses with others. The deceased challenged his right to complain, when he slapped her in the face. He then sent away Shashikant to a tailor on some pretended errand. The boy returned within a short time and on pushing the door of the room he saw that his mother was lying dead in a pool of blood with a gaping wound on her neck.

4. Immediately thereafter Shashikant lodged the information of the incident at the Bhoiwada Police Station. A constable on patrol duty who had in the meanwhile reached the spot found the appellant lying in an unconscious state with blood-stained clothes on his body and smelling of insecticide. P. S. I. Talpade took a search of the appellant and found in the pocket of his pant a blood-stained razor. The appellant was taken for antipoison treatment to the K. E. M. Hospital from where he was discharged on May, 6.

5. The post-mortem examination on the dead body of Indira was performed by Dr. Franklin who found a deep cut on her neck and a defensive incised injury on her left index finger.

6. The evidence, as earlier stated, is of an unimpeachable character. It is undisputed that Indira met with her death in the appellant s room where she had gone in response to a word sent by him. The evidence of Shashikant which has been accepted by both the Sessions Court and the High Court, shows that the appellant was in great anger and a simple request for routine help by the deceased was enough provocation for him, first to throw a pot at her and then to slap her. It is plain that he sent away the boy on a false pretext in order to leave no witness to his display of manly authority. When the boy left, there was none in the room except his mother and the appellant; and when he returned within a few minutes his mother was lying dead with a gash on her neck and the appellant was nowhere near the place.

7. The F. I. R. was lodged by Shashikant promptly and the story he then told the police is in material conformity with what he later told the Court. The appellant was found lying in an unconscious state a few furlongs away. The blood on his clothes and the blood on the razor which was found on his person belonged to the same group as the blood of the deceased.

8. The main plank of the defence was that the deceased com