The court established that conviction for murder under circumstantial evidence requires a complete and clear chain of evidence, supporting the inference of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

JUDGMENT :

JOYMALYA BAGCHI, J.

1. The appeal is directed against judgment and order dated September 27, 2022 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, North and Middle Andaman, Mayabunder in Sessions Trial No.08 of 2021/Sessions Case No.04 of 2021 convicting the appellant for commission of offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life which means imprisonment for the remainder of that person’s natural life.

PROSECUTION CASE

2. Prosecution case against the appellant is to the effect that on 06.03.2021 at 10.30 AM, appellant came running to one Sankar Mondal, member of Harinagar Gram Panchayat (PW-6) and told him that he has killed his wife and asked him to call the police. Sankar Mondal (PW-6) went to the house of the appellant and he found the latter’s wife lying in a pool of blood. He informed the police as well as the relations of the deceased.

3. Police officers came to the spot and recorded the statement of Sankar Mondal which was treated as First Information Report. Appellant was arrested from his house and on interrogation, he confessed his guilt and stated that he had kept the dagger (daw) in his house. Police took him to his residence and recovered the dagger. In conclusion of investigation, charge sheet was filed and charge under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was framed against the appellant. During trial eighteen witnesses were examined and number of documents were exhibited. In conclusion of trial, the Trial Judge by impugned judgment and order convicted the appellant.

ARGUMENTS AT THE BAR

4. Mr. D.Ilango, for the appellant contends that there is no direct evidence that the appellant murdered his wife. Motive to commit the crime has not been proved. Extra judicial confession to Sankar Mondal (PW-6) is improbable. Though it is the prosecution case, upon being informed by PW-6 around 10.45 AM police had arrived at the spot within 15 minutes, appellant was arrested much later at 4.00 PM. This improbabilises/essence of the appellant at the spot when police arrived. Signature of the witnesses on the disclosure statement is not proved and the daggar (daw) was recovered from Varandha which is accessible to all. During examination of the appellant under section 313 of the Cr.P.C, no question was put to him regarding the confession to IO leading to the recovery of weapon of offence. Hence, appellant is entitled to an order of acquittal.

5. Per contra Ms. A.S.Zinu submits that appellant suspected the fidelity of his wife who used to talk with his friend, Jeet Halder (PW-16). On the fateful day, appellant had a quarrel with his wife and stabbed her. Immediately thereafter, he confessed his guilt before Sankar Mondal (PW-6), a panchayat member. PW-6 intimated the matter to the police which was diarised – Ext.17. Thereafter, the appellant was arrested and on his showing weapon of offence i.e. daw was recovered. Case is proved beyond doubt and the appeal is liable to be dismissed.

EVIDENCE ON RECORD

6. Sankar Mondal (PW-6) is the most vital witness. He deposed on 06.03.2021, appellant came to his house and stated that he had murdered his wife and asked him to inform the police. Initially he could not believe the appellant. But when he went to his residence, he found that the body of appellant’s wife Suchitra lying in a pool of blood. He informed the police, police recorded his statement. He put his signature on the statement. He also made the stat