The testimony of close relatives in domestic crimes is valid and can establish guilt when consistent and corroborated by medical evidence; intention to kill may be inferred from the nature of the attack.

JUDGMENT :

Jobin Sebastian, J.

The sole accused in S.C. No.269/2014 on the file of the Sessions Court, Kottayam, has preferred this appeal challenging the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence passed against him for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code .

2. The prosecution case in brief is as follows:

The accused and the deceased, who were husband and wife, were residing together with their children, PW2, PW3, and CW4 (not examined), at Thiruvanchoor Parampukara Colony. While residing there, the accused attempted to molest PW2, his elder daughter and hence the relationship between the accused and the deceased got strained. Apprehending that the accused would again attempt to sexually abuse her daughter when she was away at work, the deceased left the company of the accused and started to reside in her brother’s house located at Chanthakadavu along with her children. Infuriated by the same, the accused, with an intention to do away with his wife, on 20.03.2014 at 8:00 a.m., at a concrete road proceeding from Chanthakadavu, stabbed her twice on the left chest beneath the left nipple of her breast and pushed her down into a nearby canal. Although the injured was immediately taken to a hospital, she succumbed to the injuries during medical examination. Hence, the accused is alleged to have committed the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

3. Upon completion of the investigation, the final report was laid before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Kottayam. Being satisfied that the case is one triable exclusively by a Court of Session, the learned Magistrate, after complying with all the necessary formalities, committed the case to the Court of Session, Kottayam, under Section 209 of Cr.P.C. The learned Sessions Judge, having taken cognizance, issued process to the accused, and in response to the same, the accused appeared. On the appearance of the accused before the trial court, the learned Sessions Judge, after hearing both sides under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. and upon perusal of the records, framed a written charge against the accused for offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. When the charge was read over and explained to the accused, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

4. During the trial, from the side of the prosecution, PW1 to PW22 were examined and marked Exts.P1 to P35. MO1 and MO5 were exhibited and identified. After the completion of the prosecution evidence, the accused was questioned under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., during which he denied all the incriminating materials brought out in evidence against him. Thereafter, both sides were heard under Section 232 of Cr.P.C., and since it was not a fit case to acquit the accused under the said provision, the accused was directed to enter on his defence and to adduce any evidence that he may have in support thereof. However, no evidence whatsoever was produced from the side of the accused. Thereafter, both sides were heard in detail, and finally, the learned Sessions Judge found the accused guilty of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC, and he was convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.3,00,000/-. In default of payment of the fine, the accused was ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. Fine amount, if p