Yogendra Kumar Sangal,J.;-

Accused-appellant Smt. Raj Kumari was prosecuted for committing the murder of her husband named Ram Chandra and learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Lucknow convicted her for having committed murder of Ram Chandra and awarded her life sentence under Section 302 IPC. She was further sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years under Section 201 IPC and both these sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

2. In the appeal before this Court preferred by her against the conviction and sentence by the learned Sessions Judge was challenged on the ground: - (a) that the conviction order of the appellant is bad in law; (b) there was no reliable evidence on record to warrant her conviction; (c) the learned trial court has mis-interpreted the provisions of Section 227 of the Evidence Act; (d) the case was of circumstantial evidence and the chain of circumstance was not complete and not conclusive to base the conviction; and (e) the learned trial court has not properly appreciated the explanation tendered by the appellant about her conduct under Section 313 CrPC.

3. Learned Additional Government Advocate have supported the judgment and order of the learned trial court and of awarding sentence to her as above and it was further said that there is no illegality, invalidity as well as impropriety in the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned trial court.

4. As per prosecution case, Smt. Raj Kumari appellant is the wife of Ram Chandra (deceased) and complainant Jangli is father of the deceased Ram Chandra. Out of their wedlock a son was born, now 24 years of age, living with them. They all were living in one and same house belonging to Jangli. They both i.e. husband and wife were not at good terms when the murder of Ram Chandra has taken place and Smt. Raj Kumari used to say that she is not satisfied with Ram Chandra her husband. 2-3 days before the date of occurrence some dispute arose between them and Ram Chandra had slapped and beaten her. Jangli rebuked him not to do so at that time. On 24.05.1980 after taking his mid-day meal, when Ram Chandra was sleeping in the "Kothri" of the house, appellant which using "Gandasa" (heavy cutting weapons) had giving blow of the same and committed his murder and buried his dead body after digging the floor of the another "Kothri" used to keep chaff and plastered the earth. Jangli father of the deceased remained in search of his son Ram Chandra and on inquiry she had given evasive reply regarding his whereabouts. In the next day morning i.e. on 2505.1980, when he was returning to his house after search of Ram Chandra, one Ram Nath and Bhudhu met him near his house and told that on a day before at noon time when they were passing on the way near his house some shriek from inside the house were heard. On this information when with their help he was searching him in his house and in the "Kothri" where chaff was stored they found some hollowness and softness in the floor earth of the "Kothri". Having suspicion and seeing the newly plastered floor, they dug the earth of the floor of the "Kothri" and find the dead body (corpse) of Ram Chandra there in the pit dug by them. When they inquired from Smt. Raj Kumari in this regard, who was also present there, she confessed her guilt before Jangli and Ayodhya and other villagers assembled there saying that as she was not satisfied with her husband Ram Chandra, she has committed his murder using "Gandasa" when he was sleeping there in the house and after committing the murder, she had buried his dead body there from where it was recovered.

5. Matter was informed to the police by Jangli on the same day i.e. on 25.05.1980 in the morning orally at police station Intauja. FIR was scribed on his statement and case was registered at Crime No. 140 under Section 302/201 IPC against Smt. Raj Kumari. Investigation of the case was started immediately. The investigating officer reached at the spot and seized the dead body from the pit in

Click Here to Read the rest of this document