IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act and the distinction between intention and knowledge in determining the nature of the offense under the provisions of culpable homicide and murder.

JUDGMENT :

Goutam Bhaduri, J

1) The present appeal is against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 13th February, 2020 passed by the Sessions Judge, Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja in Sessions Trial No.73/2019 whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- in absence of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for six months.

2) According to the prosecution case, on 07.06.2019 the complainant Dilsai Manjhi (P.W.5) the brother of appellant appeared before the Police Chowki Kodma, Police Station Udaipur and got recorded merg information that on 06.06.2019 at about 11.15 p.m., his brother appellant woke him-up and stated that he has assaulted his wife with an Axe on her neck, thereby she has died. On a query being made, it was stated that the deceased-wife always used to quarrel for late-coming of her husband and she was reluctant to serve food. Being agitated, on such issue he has assaulted his wife. Thereafter on 07.06.2019 the complainant went to the spot and subsequently the merg was registered by Ex.P-12 and on the basis of that, the FIR came to be registered by Ex.P-13. The appellant was apprehended and on his disclosure the Axe used in commission of crime was recovered. Apart from that, the blood stained soil was recovered and the underwear was seized from the appellant. The dead body was subjected to postmortem and the Doctor found that the cause of death was due to profuse bleeding on account of injury inflicted on neck and chin and it was reported that the death was homicidal in nature. Subsequently, the Saree of the deceased was seized and sent for FSL examination. Apart from that, the Axe and underwear were also seized from accused and sent to FSL and on these articles presence of human blood was found. As per the FSL report, the underwear of the appellant and the Saree of the deceased and Axe which contain blood stains were having B blood group.

3) During the trial the appellant abjured the guilt and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined as many as 11 witnesses and exhibited 23 documents. Since there was no plausible explanation offered by the appellant-husband for commission of murder as the incident happened in the house of the appellant itself, the trial Court after evaluating the facts and evidence, convicted the accused as aforesaid. Hence this appeal.

4) Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that there is no clinching evidence to connect the accused with the crime in question. He would submit that only on presumption, the appellant has been convicted. It is stated that there is no eye witness to the incident and the statement of the brother P.W.5 to whom the alleged disclosure was made about commission of crime, would show that he has not supported the case of prosecution before the Court. He submits that one of the witnesses to the memorandum and seizure i.e., P.W.3 was examined and though he admitted the signature but it has also been stated that the signatures were obtained on the blank paper. Consequently no credence can be given to such memorandum and seizure. He would submit that the plausible explanation which was given to the accused that the wife of the accused fell down in intoxicated state of mind thereby she sustained the injury and the appellant was not the author of the crime. Therefore, the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence be set aside and the appellant be released from jail.

5) On the other hand, learned State Counsel would submit that the appellant was rightly convicted and sentenced by the trial Court which cannot be faulted inasmuch as the accused has failed to explain as to how the dead body was in his house that too with severe injuries which could not have been happened due to mere fall at the door steps. He submits that P.W.3 has completely supported the memorandum and seizure which further stood firm by FSL report as the Saree of the d