JUDGMENT :

ABHAY S. OKA, J.

1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

FACTS

2. The appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, “the IPC”), and he has been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment. According to the prosecution’s case, the appellant murdered his wife, Geeta. Her body was found in the house of the appellant at about 5:00 p.m. on the date of the incident. The case of the prosecution is that the appellant strangulated her.

3. The prosecution's case is based on the theory of last seen together. Consequently, the prosecution contends that the appellant had not discharged the burden on him under Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (for short, “the Evidence Act”). The prosecution examined two witnesses, Sonawati (PW-1) and Hirmaniabai (PW-2).

SUBMISSIONS

4. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that this is a case of no evidence as the theory of last seen together has not been established, and no evidence has been adduced to prove the motive.

5. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the State submitted that the presumption under Section 106 of the Eviden