The main legal point established in the judgment is that the accused committed the offence under section 304 Part I of the IPC, altering the conviction from section 302 of the IPC, based on the successful completion of the chain of events and the accused's failure to substantiate her explanation for the injuries on the deceased.

M.R. Shah, J.

1.0. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order of conviction dated 04.05.2005 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (7th Fast Track Court), Surat (hereinafter referred to as "learned trial Judge") in Sessions Case No. 96/1997 by which the learned trial Judge has convicted the appellant herein - original accused for the offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as "IPC") and has sentenced her to undergo life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 250/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further 2 days' SI, the appellant herein - original accused has preferred the present Criminal Appeal.

2.0. That an FIR being I-CR No. 44/1997 was lodged by the original complainant - father of the deceased Basit with Rander Police Station, Surat against the appellant herein - original accused for the offence punishable under section 302 of the IPC. It was alleged that the accused and the deceased Basit were husband and wife residing together. It was further alleged that the deceased Basit was in habit of taking liquor and therefore, there were frequent quarrels between them. It was further alleged that the father of the accused was residing in Saudi Arabia and therefore, the accused was insisting her husband to go to Saudi Arabia. To that the deceased refused and therefore, there were quarrels between the husband and wife and the accused was insisting for Talaq and was giving threats that if Talaq is not given, he will be done to death. It was further alleged that on 06.02.1997, the day of incident at about 3.00 a.m., the deceased Basit was in drunken condition and at that time the accused tied the deceased with the cot, beaten him by stone on chest and hand, due to which the deceased died in the night of 06.02.1997/- early morning on 07.02.1997. Therefore, it was alleged that the appellant herein - original accused has committed the offence punishable under section 302 of the IPC.

2.1. That the aforesaid FIR was investigated by the Investigating Officer PSI Shri Kansara and PI Shri Parghi. The IO collected the evidence against the accused and recorded the statement of the witnesses. The IO also prepared the panchnama of the place of incident; inquest panchnama etc. The IO also collected the P.M. Report, Viscera Report etc. That on conclusion of the investigation and as the IO found that the accused had committed the offence punishable under section 302 of the IPC, the IO filed the charge-sheet against the accused in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate for the offence punishable under section 302 of the IPC.

That as the case was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate committed the case to the Sessions Court, Surat by whom the appellant herein - original accused came to be tried. That the learned trial Judge framed the charge against the accused at Exh.3 for the offence punishable under section 302 of the IPC. The plea of the accused was recorded at Exh.4 whereby the accused pleaded not guilty and therefore, she came to be tried for the aforesaid offence.

2.2. To prove the case against the accused, the prosecution examined the following witnesses.

Sr. No.	PW No.	Name of Witness	Exh. No.
1.	1	Saiyed Aamir Saiyed – complainant	11
2.	2	Akbaribegum Saiyed Aamir	15
3.	3	Abdul Gani @ Gabal Mohammed @ Raju Boringwala	16
4.	4	Saiyed Aarif Saiyed Amin	18
5.	5	Tasminbegum Saiyed Aamir  Saiyed	21
6.	6	Sahanabegum Mohammed Naim	22
7.	7	Saiyed Salar Saiyed Umar	25
8.	11	Saiyed Aadil Saiyed Aamir Saiyed	32
9.	12	Nankiben Thakorbhai Rathod	33
10.	14	Rizvanabegum Saiyed Aamir	48
11.	15	Anverkhan Gulamkhan Pathan	49
12.	8	Ismail Aadam Patel	26