A.R. Joshi, J.

1. Heard rival submissions on this Criminal Appeal preferred by the appellant/orig. accused challenging the judgment and order of conviction dated 27th April, 2005 passed by the Sessions Judge, Raigad Alibag in Sessions Case No.47 of 2005. By the impugned judgment and order the appellant/accused was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and was sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life

2. The case of the prosecution, in nutshell, is as under:

Marriage between appellant/accused and his wife victim Nagi (since deceased) took place some time in the year 2001. Appellant/accused was quarreling with the victim his wife and was beating her at times on the ground that she was frequently visiting her parents. In the year 2004, though there was custom that a woman should visit the house of her parents on the occasion of SarvapitraAmavasya, she did not visit and as such her father Balya Pingla had been to the house of appellant/accused. That time, he found that his daughter Nagi was beaten by her husband and she was unable to walk. As such by arranging a palanquin she was brought to the house of Balya Pingala. This happened about 10 days prior to the fateful incident. The incident of assault occurred on 4.11.2004. After coming to the house of her parents, victim Nagi has started residing in the nearby house of her paternal grandmother i.e. PW.5 Tai Pingala. As such on the night of the incident, victim Nagi was sleeping with her grandmother at her house. In the midnight, appellant/accused entered the house and assaulted the victim on her face and head by means of wooden log. Noticing the commotion in the house, Tai Pingala (PW5) woke up and noticed that appellant/accused was assaulting victim Nagi. PW5 Tai Pingala tried to apprehend appellant/accused by catching hold of him. However, he pushed Tai away and ran away by backside door. When initially Tai Pingla noticed the incident of assault, she raised shouts and as such one neighbour Ganpat Khema (PW2) reached there and saw appellant/accused running away from the house of Tai Pingala. Appellant/accused could not be found for four days and he was subsequently arrested on 8.11.2004 under the panchnama.

3. According to the case of prosecution, when after the assault appellant/accused ran away from the spot, people gathered there. Intimation was given to PW3 Balya Pingala (father of the victim) and PW1 Nagya Pingla (paternal uncle of victim). Apparently due to the assault, victim had died on the spot on receiving severe bleeding injuries on her head and neck. PW1 Nagya Pingala lodged a complaint with the police against appellant/accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. Investigation was started. Inquest panchnama was conducted. Clothes from the person of the dead body were taken charge of. Spot panchnama was also conducted. Dead body was sent for postmortem and postmortem report (Exh.16) was obtained. The external Injuries observed by the Dr. Waman Suryawanshi (PW4) are as under:-

1) Contused lacerated wound coupled with fracture mandible, right side cheek 3 cm x 2 cm x 1.5 cm.

2) Contusion on right ear pinna with bleeding present from the ear.

3) contusion behind neck 6 cm x 3.5 cm oblique, coupled with fracture of underline bone.

4) fracture of spine second survical vertibra. All the above injuries were antemortem.

The Doctor noticed following internal injuries :

1) fracture on right mandible.

2) Fracture of right maxilla.

3) subdural haemetoma on right side.

All the injuries were antemortem.

4. After completion of investigation, chargesheet was filed against appellant/accused. During the trial, total five witnesses were examined. Out of them, important witnesses are PW5 Tai Pingala who is an eye witness. Part of the incident as to appellant/accused running away from the spot, is witnessed by PW2 Ganpat Khema. As such, there is corroboration to the substantive evidence of PW5 Tai Pingala by the substantive evidence of PW2