A. K. SHRIVASTAVA, J.

( 1 ) PEELING aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 9-3-1998 passed by additional Sessions Judge, Sehore Camp ashata in Sessions Trial No. 77/97 convicting the appellant under Sections 302, IPC and sentencing him to suffer Rigorous imprisonment of life and fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default of payment of fine, further RI of six months, this appeal has been preferred by the appellant under Section 374 (2) of code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

( 2 ) IN brief, the case of prosecution is that complainant-Durga Bai is the wife of appellant and got married to him 4-5 years prior to the date of incident. Jasoda Bai (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased') is the mother of complainani-Durga Bai and used to go to the house of her daughter Durga bai frequently. The appellant was having certain doubt about the character of his wife as well as of deceased. The appellant was insisting his wife not to go to the house of her mother.

( 3 ) TWO days earlier to the incident, appellant brought an axe, embedded wooden stick in it and kept it in the house. On the date of incident when appellant went to his work place as he is a labourer, he warned the complainant-Durga Bai that today her mother (deceased) will not be spared. On the date of incident i. e. 22-7-1995 in the evening at 6/6-30 appellant came to his house and after staying for some time, picked up the axe and went away. The action of appellant going from his house with axe was told by complainant-Durga Bai to her neighbours saurabh Bai and Rukma Bai. These ladies were talking to each other, at that time younger sister of complainant-Durga Bai came and informed that appellant has killed the deceased by axe. Durga Bai when came to the place of occurrence found that inside house, her mother was lying dead.

( 4 ) FIRST information report Ext. P/2 was lodged by Durga Bai and the matter was investigated by the prosecution agency.

( 5 ) AFTER completion of the investigation a charge-sheet was submitted in the competent Court which, on its turn, committed the case to the Court of Session and fromwhere it was received by trial Court for trial.

( 6 ) THE trial Court framed charge punishable under Section 302, IPC which was denied by the appellant, as a result of which, prosecution examined as many as 12 witnesses had placed certain documents on record.

( 7 ) THE defence of accused is of maladroit implication and the same defence he set forth in his statement recorded under Section 313, Cr. P. C. However, he did not choose to examine any witness in support of his defence.

( 8 ) LEARNED trial Judge, on the basis of the evidence placed on record, came to hold that the charge levelled against appellant under Section 302, IPC is proved as a result of which, convicted him and passed the sentence which we have mentioned herein above.

( 9 ) HENCE, this appeal has been filed by the appellant assailing the judgment of conviction and order of sentence.

( 10 ) WE have heard Sri S. K. Nema, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri r. S. Patel, learned Additional Advocate general for respondent/state.

( 11 ) HAVING heard learned counsel for the parties, we are of the considered view that this appeal deserves to be dismissed.

( 12 ) IN the present case, the sole eyewitness is Sunita who is a child witness having age of seven years when the incident took place. She has specifically stated that at 8. 00 in the evening when she was playing nearby her house, at that juncture, appellant by carrying an axe entered inside the house and dealt blow of axe on the head of the deceased and thereafter he ran away towards mosque. Her mother died immediately. Thereafter this witness after closing the door straightway went to the house of her sister complainant-Durga and narrated the entire incident to her. Thereafter her sister Durga came to the place of occurrence and found the deceased lying in injured condition, she was dead. This witness though a child witness but despi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document