IMPORTANT POINT
The burden of proving a plea specially set up by an accused lies upon him, and the burden of proving a fact especially within knowledge lies upon the person. The application of Section 106 of the Evidence Act in cases where the prosecution has succeeded in establishing facts from which a reasonable inference can be drawn regarding the existence of certain other facts within the special knowledge of the accused.

JUDGMENT :

Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

1. This criminal appeal preferred under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, the Cr.P.C.) is directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 08.09.2023 passed by the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Sakti, District Janjgir-Champa, in Sessions Trial No.11 of 2020 by which the appellant has been convicted for offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine amount of Rs. 5,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo additional rigorous imprisonment for six months.

2. This case was listed today for consideration of IA No. 1 of 2023 which is an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the appellant/accused. However, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter has been heard finally.

3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 20.06.2020, the informant Hirabai Rana (PW-1) gave an information at Police Chowki, Faguram that she resides at village Kekrabhanta and does the household work. Her husband had expired way back. In his house, his elder son Vedprakash Rana, daughter-in-law Dolawati and their two children reside. Vedprakash used to doubt the character of his wife. He suspected that the sister of the informant also used to help her wife in doing wrong things. On this ground, a quarrel took place on 19.06.2020 between Ved Prakash and his wife. He said that he would not keep her with him upon which the informant and her sister Nankun Bai (hereinafter referred to as ‘the deceased’) took the wife of the Vedprakash to the house of former Sarpanch of the village Surendra Kumar Rana. On 20.06.2020 at about 5:30 a.m. when she and the appellant were at home, at that time, Nankun Bai came to their house and was advising the appellant not to quarrel with his wife. Upon this, the appellant got enraged and stated as to who she was to give him any advice and stated that she helps her wife in doing wrong things and he would kill her on that day. Uttering all these words, the appellant brought a sword like weapon from a room and assaulted on the neck of deceased. The deceased fell on the ground and died.

4. On the basis of above information, an unnumbered merg intimation (Exhibit P/3) was registered at 7:30 a.m. of 20.06.2020 by C.P.Kanwar (PW-15). On the basis of said merg intimation, Dehati Nalishi (PW-1) was registered at about 8:00 a.m. and later on, at about 10:40 a.m, FIR (Exhibit P/42) bearing Crime No. 256/2020 was registered by Mitthu Barman (PW-17) for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC.

5. Dead body of the deceased was sent for postmortem to Community Health Centre, Dabhra where Dr. Shalini Kurrey (PW-13) conducted the postmortem. The memorandum statement (Exhibit P/14) of the accused/ appellant was recorded at 12:20 hours and was arrested (Exhibit P/10) on the same day at about 14:10 hours.

6. After investigation, Criminal Case No. 139/2020 was registered against the appellant/accused and charge sheet was filed by the police before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dabhra. However, as the said case was triable by the Court of Sessions, the same was committed to the Court of 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Sakti vide order dated 14.09.2020.

7. Charges were framed on 06.09.2021 against the accused/appellant for the offence under Section 302 of the IPC which was denied by the appellant and prayed for trial.

8. In order to bring home the offence, the prosecution examined as many as 17 witnesses and exhibited 43 documents. The defence has neither examined any witness nor has exhibited any document.

9. The learned trial Court upon appreciation of oral and documentary evidence on record and considering that it is the appellant who has committed the murder of the deceased, convicted and sentenced him under Section 302 of the IPC, against which the instant appeal under Section 374(2) of t