The main legal point established in the judgment is that the prosecution successfully proved the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt based on the motive of the offence, extra judicial confession, and recoveries made consequent to the appellant's disclosure statement.

LISA GILL, J.

1. The appellant – Naveen @ Meenu son of Gopi Ram has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC by the learned Sessions Judge, Bhiwani vide judgment dated 07.11.2009. He has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life vide order dated 09.11.2009, besides, pay a fine of Rs. 25,000/- and in default thereof, undergo further rigorous imprisonment for two years. Aggrieved from his aforesaid conviction and sentence, the appellant has approached this Court, by filing the instant appeal.

2. As per the prosecution version, PW1 Fateh Singh (complainant) met Inspector Data Ram (PW10) along with other police officials on 12.03.2009 at 12.15 p.m. at the Bus Stand Baliyali. Statement (Ex.P1) of Fateh Singh (complainant) was recorded by PW10 Inspector Data Ram. The complainant Fateh Singh informed that his daughter Bimla @ Kali (deceased) was married to the appellant – Naveen @ Meenu about 10 years prior to the incident that occurred on 12.03.2009. Two sons, namely, Ravi (6 years old) and Golu (5 years old) were born from their marriage. Appellant – Naveen @ Meenu was stated to be a drunkard and a gambler. The appellant used to demand money from Bimla @ Kali (deceased) for gambling and when she did not give money to him, he sold her ornaments and squandered the money. The appellant demanded money from Bimla @ Kali (deceased) on the occasion of 'Makar Sakranti'. When she refused, Bimla @ Kali was subjected to physical abuse by the appellant. Bimla @ Kali was got treated at Bhiwani and Rohtak. However, no criminal action was taken against the appellant because the complainant's daughter, Bimla @ Kali stopped them from taking action as she wanted to live in her matrimonial home to look after her children. The complainant was informed telephonically by Gopi Ram (father of the appellant) on 12.03.2009 at about 7.00 a.m., that the complainant's daughter, Bimla @ Kali was murdered by the appellant on the night intervening 11/12.03.2009.

3. The complainant, on receipt of this information, proceeded to village Baliyali along with his wife, nephew Rishi Pal and other persons. They found that the appellant had caused injuries on the eyes and face of deceased – Bimla @ Kali. The complainant expressed a firm belief that the appellant had done his wife Bimla @ Kali to death.

4. FIR (Ex.P26) was registered on the abovesaid statement of the complainant – Fateh Singh. Photographs (Ex.P2 to P8) of the place of incident as well as of the dead body were taken. Inquest report (Ex.P17) was prepared. The deadbody was sent for post-mortem examination through PW8 ASI Ajit Singh along with an application (Ex.P14). The blood at the spot and the pieces of broken bangles (Ex.P25) were lifted and taken in possession vide memo Ex.P19. Rough site plan (Ex.P20) of the place of occurrence was prepared. Post-mortem examination on the dead-body of Bimla @ Kali was conducted by Dr. S.S.Dhankar (PW9) along with Dr. T.S.Bagri. Post-mortem report (Ex.P16) is on record. The parcel of clothes, sample seal etc. were handed over by the doctor to ASI Ajit Singh (PW8). They were taken in possession by PW10 Inspector Data Ram vide Ex.P15.

5. The appellant was produced before PW10 Inspector Data Ram on 13.03.2009 by Laxman Singh Ranga (PW3) in the presence of Ajit Singh (PW8) son of Fateh Singh and Ram Chander (PW6). The appellant had made an extra judicial confession before PW3 Laxman Singh Ranga admitting that he murdered his wife on 12.03.2009. The statement of Laxman Singh Ranga (PW3) was recorded.

6. The appellant made a disclosure statement (Ex.P10) stating that when his wife Bimla @ Kali refused to give him money for alcohol and gambling, he slapped her and inflicted fist blows on her face. He then strangulated her with a multi-coloured bed sheet. The said bed-sheet, the appellant's vest and shirt were stained with blood. The appellant had put the abovesaid articles in a polythene bag and concealed them in an almirah of his house. Pursuan