The corroboration of witness statements and the presence of incriminating evidence can establish guilt beyond any doubt or debate.

SANJIV KHANNA, J (ORAL)

1. Hansraj @ Sonu impugns judgment dated 6th June, 2011, convicting him for murder of his wife Santosh in the intervening night between 16th and 17th April, 2009, in the tenanted room located on the ground floor of House No.A-5, B Block, Gali No.11, near Geeta Bhawan Mandir, Badli Extension, Delhi. By the order on sentence dated 6th June, 2011, the appellant has been sentenced to life imprisonment along with fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC” for short). In default, the appellant has to undergo simple imprisonment of two months. Benefit of Section 428 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C., for short) is directed to be given.

2. The post-mortem report of Santosh marked Ex.PX establishes homicidal death as a result of multiple incised wounds, about nine in number, of which two were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. The cause of death as opined was hemorrhagic shock consequent upon injuries to the heart and liver by a sharp, cutting and penetrating weapon. Injuries No.3 and 8, i.e. incised penetrating wound 3 x 1 x 2 cm with tailing at upper angle of wound, placed vertical over midline about 7 cm below supra sterna notch and the incised wound penetrating wound 3 x 1.8 cm on right side chest at mid clavicular line about 1 cm above lower costal margin, were sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature, individually or collectively. The injuries were ante-mortem in nature

3. On the question of date and time of the occurrence and involvement of the appellant, we have the testimonies of Master Rishi (PW-3) and Raj Kumar (PW-4), in addition to the assertions by the police witnesses who had reached the place of occurrence immediately after the violence had occurred. Master Rishi (PW-3), son of the deceased and the present appellant, was above five years of age at the time of occurrence and seven years of age when his court testimony was recorded on 10.02.2011. Master Rishi (PW-3) claims and asserts that he was sleeping in the room where the occurrence took place with his mother Santosh. His father came at night and started quarrelling with his mother. His father was drunk and had abused his mother using filthy language. He had seen his father stabbing his mother after catching her hair. He had hidden under the bed as he was afraid that he too would be killed. The appellant had stabbed his mother four times with a knife and thereupon, his mother had fallen down. His mother had shouted for help and some persons had chased the appellant. The said persons had come after hearing the cries of his mother and had opened the door of the room. His father had then fled away. He identified his father i.e. the appellant Hans Raj who was sitting in the Court when his deposition was recorded on 10th February, 2011.

4. Learned amicus curiae has drawn our attention to the cross-examination of Master Rishi (PW-3) and that the said child witness had not answered several questions in his cross-examination. It is highlighted that even Court questions were not answered. It is submitted that the version given by Master Rishi being tutored and unreliable, should not be accepted. We have examined the cross-examination of PW-3 which for the sake of convenience is reproduced in entirety.

“I am having one sister. We are both living together. When my mother was alive, at that time also, I and my sister were living together. It is incorrect to suggest that I was tutored by my maternal grandparents (Nana and Nani). I has seen the incident and hidden myself underneath the bed. It was double bed having boxes. Q. Do you understand what is truth and what is lie? The witness is not answering. Today, I have come from the house of my Nana. I obey my maternal grandparents. My Nana had told me to depose in the Court. I have deposed whatever has been told by my Nana to me. Q. You have stated in the court that you have seen the incident because i