SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(MP) 1413

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
P. K. JAISWAL, I. S. SHRIVASTAVA, JJ.
NANNOOLAL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF M. P. – Respondent
Cri. Appeal No. 1094 of 2001
Decided On : 01-08-2011

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : R. K. Trivedi
For the Respondent: C. R. Karnik

The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on medical evidence, witness statements, and the accused's own admission to establish guilt in a murder case.

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code - Murder - Section 302, Section 203 - [302, 203] - The court discussed the evidence and circumstances leading to the conclusion that the appellant murdered his wife due to suspicion over her character. The medical evidence and witness statements supported the conclusion that the death was homicidal in nature, not a suicide. The court referred to legal provisions and case law to support the conviction of the appellant.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant was convicted of murdering his wife and falsely reporting it as a suicide. The prosecution presented evidence of the appellant's altercation with his wife and medical evidence indicating homicidal death. The appellant claimed innocence based on lack of direct evidence and contradictions in the prosecution's case.

Finding of the Court:

The court found the appellant guilty based on medical evidence, witness statements, and the appellant's own admission of suspicion over his wife's character. The court rejected the appellant's claim of innocence and upheld the conviction.

Issues: The main issue was whether the appellant was responsible for his wife's death, and if the evidence presented by the prosecution was sufficient to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on medical evidence, witness statements, and the appellant's own admission to conclude that he murdered his wife. The court also referred to legal provisions and case law to support the conviction.

Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant's conviction for murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was upheld.

JUDGMENT :

I. S. SHRIVASTAVA, J.

1. This appeal has been preferred being aggrieved by the judgment dated 4-9-2001 passed by the Court of Shri V. P. S. Chouhan, Additional Sessions Judge, Narsinghgarh, Distt. Rajgarh (Biaora) in S.T. No. 77/2001, by which the appellant has been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code with life imprisonment along with fine of ` 2,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo additional simple imprisonment of six months and under Section 203 of the Indian Penal Code with rigorous imprisonment for one year.

2. According to the prosecution story, on 14-3-2001, at 6.10 a.m., Nannoolal lodged the report in the Police Station, Kuravar that in the last evening at about 7.00 p.m. he and his wife returned home from factory. He inquired from his wife Tulsibai that in the way to whom she was talking. She replied why he had suspicion without any reason on her then Nannoolal told that he has seen her several times. On this point Tulsibai started altercation, hence Nunnoolal gave her two slaps. Thereafter, Tulsibai cooked the food and Nannoolal and his children after having dinner slept. At about 4.30 a.m. Nannoolal awoke and saw that his wife Tulsibai was hanging in the room by strangulation of Saree then he after opening the Saree laid her on the bed and saw that she was dead, hence he had come to report to the Police Station. This report was lodged at Merg No. 8/2001, thereafter police reached the spot. On inspection of the spot it was found that the wooden log on which it was alleged that Tulsibai hanged herself was intact. The dust on the log and webs of the spiders were untouched. On perusal of the Saree it was found that it was not used for hanging. On inquiry from Nannoolal before the witnesses he told that in the evening he had an altercation with his wife in which he throttled her neck and tied her neck with Saree and killed her and thereafter he cooked the food and then fed his children. Vinod aged 6-7 years son of Nannoolal confirmed this fact. In this way it was found that Nannoolal murdered his wife by throttling and suppressing this fact he made a report to the police pretending it to be a case of suicide. Hence, Crime No. 47/2001, was registered at Police Station Kuravar under Section 302/201 of the Indian Penal Code and the appellant was arrested. After trial the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as mentioned above. Hence, this appeal has been filed by the appellant.

3. It has been argued by the Counsel for the appellant that he has been falsely implicated in this case; It was a case of suicide by Tulsibai. There was no evidence to prove the guilt of the appellant. His child Vinod was not produced in evidence, who is said to be the eye-witness of the incident. The case is based on the circumstantial evidence and there was no direct evidence or eye-witness. The chain of circumstantial evidence was not complete. The appellant was involved on the basis of suspicion only. There were serious contradiction and omission in the prosecution evidence. The doctor who conducted the post-mortem examination did not find any sign of strangulation on the neck of the deceased. The Trial Court Tailed to appreciate the fact that by the knot of the siring there may be fracture in the thyroid and it was the case of suicide. The Trial Court erred in coming to the conclusion that the appellant was within his wife at the time of the incident, hence he is responsible for the death of his wife. The Trial Court further erred in not considering the fact that there was no evidence that Tulsibai was a woman of bad character and lived in adultery. There was no mens rea on record to come to the conclusion that why appellant will commit the murder of his wife, hence the appeal should be allowed.

4. It has been argued by the Counsel for the respondent that by evidence it was proved that the appellant murdered his wife and pretending it as a case of suicide falsely made a report to the police. The ci

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top