2007 (1) Crimes 44
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
S. L. Kochar, J.
Jujhar Singh - Appellant
versus
State of M.P - Respondent
Cri. Appeal No. 437 of 1994
Decided on 14.11.2005

IMPORTANT POINT
Merely because a witness is child, his/her evidence is not liable to be rejected when his/her evidence stands tests of searching cross-examination and is supported by evidence of other prosecution witnesses.

Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Evidence Act - Section 3 - Offence of murder - Testimony of child witness - Admissibility of - Conviction of appellant under Sections 302/201/176, IPC for causing death of his wife and cremating her dead body without informing her family members - Evidence of family members of deceased that she was ill-treated and given beating by appellant and was not given proper food in her matrimonial house - Deceased died in room of appellant - Funeral was performed without lodging any report at police station and post-mortem examination of deceased - Evidence of child eyewitness, six years aged daughter of deceased that at night appellant came in room where she and her deceased mother were sitting, caused kick blows to her mother and thereafter pressed her mother’s neck - Specified statement of child eyewitness that at the time of incident she was sitting with her mother and was not sleeping - No reason to discard testimony of child - Nothing brought on record by defence to say that PW6 was a tutored witness - Merely because PW6 was a child witness, it could not be presumed that she must have been tutored - No chance given by PW6 to defence to bring any such material to hold that she was not inside room with her parents and that she was tutored for giving statements in Court against appellant - Evidence of PW6 corroborated on material; particulars by statements of other prosecution witnesses - Child witness held fully reliable witness - No explanation offered by appellant as to why no information was given by appellant to parents of deceased about her death and regarding her funeral - Way in which funeral was performed hurriedly held a strong circumstance against appellant - Conviction of appellant under Section 302 IPC held justified.

       (Paras 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29 & 30)

       Facts of the case:

       1. The appellant herein in the instant case was convicted under Sections 302/201/176 IPC for causing death of his wife and cremating her dead body without informing her family members.

       2. Aggrieved by said order of conviction and sentence, appellant has preferred present appeal.

       3. Findings of the Court: The Court held that evidence of family members of deceased proved that she was ill-treated and given beating by appellant and was not given proper food in her matrimonial house. Deceased had died in room of appellant. Funeral was performed without lodging any report at police station and post mortem examination of deceased. Evidence of child eye-witness, six years aged daughter of deceased that at night appellant came in room where she and her deceased mother were sitting, caused kick blows to her mother and thereafter pressed her mother’s neck. Specified statement of child eyewitness that at time of incident she was sitting with her mother and was not sleeping. No reason to discard testimony of child. Nothing brought on record by defence to say that PW6 was a tutored witness. Merely because PW6 was a child witness, it could not be presumed that she must have been tutored. No chance was given by PW6 to defence to bring any such material to hold that she was not inside room with her parents and that she was tutored for giving statements in Court against appellant. Evidence of PW6 was corroborated on material; particulars by statements of other prosecution witnesses. Child witness was held fully reliable witness. No explanation was offered by appellant as to why no information was given by appellant to parents of deceased about her death and regarding her funeral. Way in which funeral was performed hurriedly held a strong circumstance against appellant. Conviction of appellant under Section 302 IPC held justified.

       Result: Appeal dismissed.