The prosecution can establish a chain of circumstances to prove the guilt of an accused in a murder case, even in the absence of direct evidence.

JUDGMENT

Debangsu Basak, J. - The elder brother of the deceased had lodged a complaint with the police on July 20, 2015 which was registered as Moyna Police Station Case No. 165/2015 dated July 20, 2015 under Sections 498A/302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. In the police complaint, the elder brother of the deceased had stated that, the deceased and the appellant were married. They had lived peacefully and happily for around 15 years. Out of the wedlock, a daughter and a son had been born. Four years prior to the police complaint, the appellant tortured the deceased physically and mentally. The deceased had asked him not to complain to any person as she wanted to live in her matrimonial home. When the level of torture had increased, the deceased informed the matter to him. Several attempts had been made to settle the domestic problems through village mediation. On July 19, 2015 at around 2 o'clock in the noon, the deceased and the appellant returned from Mumbai. On that night, the deceased had gone to the Rath fair with the appellant. After visiting the fair, they had returned to their home. An altercation had happened between the deceased and the appellant with regard to domestic issues. At around 11:40 PM in the night, the appellant had tied hands of the deceased to the back of the plastic chair with the help of cloth. He had then poured alcohol on the entire body and set it on fire. The deceased had fallen down on the ground. Thereafter, the appellant had cut the throat of the deceased with a sharp cutting tool and killed her brutally. As soon as the de-facto complainant had received the news he had gone to the matrimonial home of the deceased with other people. There he had noticed the deceased to be lying dead on the ground with the hands tied. He had also seen a bloodstained sharp cutting tool beside the dead body of the deceased. After the police had been informed, they came to the spot and took the dead body for post-mortem.

3. Police had investigated the First Information Report and submitted a charge sheet with regard thereto. The Court had framed charges against the appellant under Sections 498A/302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 on February 19, 2016. The appellant had pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

4. In order to prove the charges as against the appellant, the prosecution had examined 23 witnesses. The prosecution had relied upon various documentary and material evidences. On conclusion of the evidence of the prosecution, the appellant had been examined under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code where he had claimed himself to be innocent and falsely implicated.

5. The de facto complainant had been examined as PW 1 by the prosecution. He had reiterated the contents of the written complaint. He had stated that, the police seized the sharp cutting tool on July 20, 2015. He had stated that, the First Information Report was written by the scribe in accordance with the instructions given by him and in front of him. He had said that, the written complaint was read over and explained to him. He had tendered the written complaint which was marked as Exhibit 1.

6. A neighbour of the appellant had deposed as PW 2. He had stated that, the appellant used to torture the deceased physically and mentally. There had been mediation within the locality twice with regard to the disputes between the deceased and the appellant. He had stated that on July 19, 2015 at 1:30 PM the deceased and the appellant returned from Mumbai and they went to the Rath fair. At 11:30 PM another neighbour of the appellant had called him stating that some sound was coming from the house of the appellant and that there was screaming of somebody from the house of the appellant. The local people had gone to the house of the appellant with light. When the local people which included PW 2 were going through the road, he saw the appellant run away by opening his door of the house. He had described the apparels worn by the appellant at that point