The court upheld the conviction for murder based on eyewitness testimony and established motive, dismissing intoxication as a defense.

JUDGMENT :

Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.

1. We have already heard Mr. Dhirendra Kumar Prasad, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Fahad Allam, learned A.P.P. appearing for the State.

2. Instant criminal appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 04.04.2019 and order of sentence dated 12.04.2019 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge - XIV, Hazaribagh in S.T. No.573 of 2013, whereby and whereunder the appellant has been held guilty for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life along with fine of Rs.10,000/- with default stipulation.

FACTUAL MATRIX

3. Factual matrix giving rise to this appeal is that the informant's daughter Suma Devi, aged about 30 years (since deceased), was married with Prem Ram (appellant) about 12 years ago according to Hindu rites and rituals. After marriage, Soma Devi started residing at her matrimonial home along with her husband and other family members. It is alleged that out of their wedlock, both were blessed with three children namely Shital Ravidas, aged about 10 years, Karan Ravidas, aged about 7 years and Kumkum Ravidas, aged about 4 years. It is alleged that since two years ago, there was very tense relationship between Suma Devi and her husband Prem Ravidas. The reason was that the husband Prem Ravidas (appellant) was suspecting the fidelity/character of his wife and was apprehensive that his wife is living an adulterous relationship with another boy. In this connection, Panchayati was also convened thrice, where Prem Ram was warned against suspecting the fidelity of his wife without any cogent reasons and further warned not to consume liquor. It is alleged that on 04.07.2013 at about 04:00 a.m. in morning, the informant was communicated through phone call that Prem Ram has committed murder of Suma Devi in the last night by assaulting her through axe. The informant along with other family members went to the matrimonial home of her daughter and found dead body lying in a room and all the three children were crying. She noticed serious injury on the back of her head due to which she died. Informant's eldest grand-daughter (natin) Shital disclosed that her father had inflicted axe blow and thereby caused murder of her mother. She also disclosed about participation of brother of Prem Ram and his wife Sarita Devi also in commission of the alleged murder. After the occurrence, all the above three persons absconded from the house.

On the basis of fardbeyan of the informant Malti Devi, Kaktamsandi P.S. Case No.142 of 2013 dated 04.07.2013 was registered for the offence under Section 302/34 of the I.P.C. against the above named three accused persons.

4. In the course of investigation, present appellant Prem Ram was arrested and charge-sheet was submitted against him for the offence under Section 302 of the I.P.C. continuing the investigation against the other accused persons. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions where the accused appeared and denied from the charge levelled against him and claimed to be tried. After conclusion of trial, impugned judgment and order has been passed.

5. Learned counsel for appellant assailing the impugned judgment and order has argued that all the witnesses examined in this case appears to be interested witnesses and no eye witness has been examined excluding the tutored child witness P.W.15. Prosecution story does not find corroboration from any independent source. The prosecution has failed to bring on record any link evidence against the appellant which is evident from the evidence of Investigating Officer that weapon used in commission of crime, i.e., the axe was not seized and blood stained clothes of the