The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of witness testimonies, medical evidence, and the application of Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code in determining the guilt of the appellant for murder.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. Awanish Ranjan Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. Saket Kumar, learned A.P.P.

2. This appeal is directed against the Judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27.09.2016 (Sentence passed on 29.09.2016), passed by Sri Manish Ranjan, learned Additional Sessions Judge, IX, Palamau at Daltonganj, in connection with Sessions Trial No. 45 of 2011, arising out of Bishrampur P.S. Case No.10 of 2010, corresponding to G.R. No.150 of 2010, whereby and wherein, the learned Additional Sessions Judge IX, Palamau at Daltonganj held the appellant, Abdul Rauf, guilty of the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, for committing murder of his mother-in-law, Husn Ara and thereby, sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life alongwith a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, the appellant was further directed to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months. The appellant was also directed to pay a compensation amount of Rs.10,000/- to the dependents of the deceased Husn Ara and in default of payment of compensation he was further sentenced to undergo Simple imprisonment for six months.

3. Prosecution case was instituted on the basis of fardbeyan of the informant Istiyak Ansari alleging therein that on 01.02.2010 at about 07:35 P.M., the appellant demanded Rs.2 Lakhs from his mother-in-law, namely, Husn Ara, when his mother-in-law expressed her inability to acquiesce to his wishes he gave a “Gainta” blow on her neck due to which she succumbed to her injuries. On hulla by the informant and his family members people of the locality assembled there and the appellant was apprehended at the place of occurrence. It is further alleged that the appellant also assaulted the informant when he tried to apprehend him.

4. After investigation, police found the occurrence to be true and submitted charge-sheet against the appellant for the offences under sections 302/307 of the Indian Penal Code. After cognizance the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palamau at Daltonganj, committed the case to the Court of Sessions on 15.01.2011, as it was exclusively triable by the Sessions Court.

5. Charge was framed against the appellant on 09.09.2011, under Sections 302/307 of the Indian Penal Code. The contents of the charge was read over and explained to him in Hindi to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. In order to prove its case, the prosecution has adduced both oral and documentary evidence.

7. Istiyak Ansari (P.W.1) is the informant of this case. He has supported the prosecution case as narrated in his fardbeyan. He has identified his signature on the fardbeyan which is Ext.-1.

Mehboob Alam (P.W.2) is a hearsay witness. He has stated that when he reached at the place of occurrence, he saw that the villagers had apprehended the appellant. Police recovered a “Gainta” in his presence. He has identified his signature on the seizure list which is Ext.-2.

Rehana Khatoon (P.W.3) is Sister-in-Law of the appellant. She is an eye witness and has supported the prosecution case.

Md. Tabib (P.W.4) is also a hearsay witness. He has stated that on hulla when he went to the place of occurrence he saw dead body of the deceased. He has stated that the appellant was apprehended by the villagers. Police recovered a “Gainta” in his presence. He had identified his signature on the seizure list which is Ext.-2/1.

Sultan Ansari (P.W.5) is a material witness. He has stated that on Hulla he went to the house of the informant he saw that the appellant was fleeing from there. He caught hold of him. He further raised “hulla” and villagers came and they all apprehended the appellant.

Guddu Ansari (P.W.6), is another hearsay witness. He has stated that on hulla he went to the house of the informant and saw the dead body of the deceased.

Farzana Khatoon @ Ruby (P.W.7) is the wife of the appellant, she has supported the prosecution case and has stated that when her mother expressed her inability t