Subhedar, A J C—The appellant, Mt. Parwati, has been convicted by Mr. Nashikkar, Additional Sessions Judge, Buldana, of murdering one Prayagi, a girl nine years of age, and sentenced, under S. 306, I.P.C., to transportation for life. The appeal was filed from jail and as the appellant was a mere labourer she was not represented by any counsel at the hearing of the appeal. Having however very carefully gone through the record and critically examined the several articles and documents in evidence with the assistance of the learned Government Advocate, I am clearly of opinion that the conviction of the appellant is unsustainable and she is entitled to an acquittal. The judgment under appeal though lengthy is indeed very perfunctory. As I will show later on, the learned Judge has not only completely ignored some of the important features which emerge from the prosecution evidence itself, but he has glossed over difficult questions which arose for decision. He does not appear to have gone deep into the evidence and therefore most of his findings are palpably wrong. Now and again ingenious attempts have been made by him either to explain away or to water down the points which tell against the prosecution. Further, the record of the evidence in the case has been so carelessly made that some of the important prosecution witnesses were not questioned on crucial points, which were apparently within their knowledge and which, if elucidated, might possibly have strengthened the case for the prosecution, or at least have cleared up matters which are left obscure. What appears to have happened is that upon a superficial consideration of certain broad features of the case the learned Judge was hastily convinced of the guilt of the accused to such an extent that he failed to view the evidence id its true perspective. This impression of mine derives considerable support from the fact that the learned Judge refrained from passing the normal sentence of death-which is the only suitable one in the case of child murder committed for the sake of petty ornaments-upon the appellant for the following reasons:

I am convinced that the accused acted under sheet momentary impulse without fully realizing grave consequences. The accused belongs to that sex which is generally allowed some leniency in the matter of punishment and the case is easily distinguishable from type of brutal murders usually committed for robbery.

2. In order to properly appreciate the case for the prosecution and the evidence tendered in its support, it is necessary to state a few facts which were either not disputed by the appellant or are sufficiently proved.

(a) The deceased Prayagi had just completed 9 years at the time of her death. She was a daughter of one Sakharam and Zumki (P.W. 16), who have another daughter, named Dari, younger than Prayagi. Sakharam is the son of Asru Balwanta Kunbi (P.W. 17) and Zumki is the daughter of Narayan Yesu Kunbi (P.W. 3). These people reside in the village of Tad-Seoni. Ex. P-13, the map which is not drawn to scale, shows that the house of Sakharam and Zumki is close to that of the appellant and the house of one Bandu only intervenes between the houses of Narayan and Sakharam. Although Asru lived separate from his son Sakharam his house is not shown in the map. The house of Gaba (P.W. 4) adjoins that of Sakharam.

(b) The relations between Zumki and the appellant had become strained since January 1935, for the following reasons, given by the former in her examination-in-chief:

I am not on talking terms with her since Pus month. Once my Bodice (sic) and Prayagi's Fadki were thrown into a well and I abased Parwati suspecting her of the mischief. She retaliated and picked up a quarrel.

3. In cross-examination Zumki cleared up the point by further stating:

I had no suspicion against any one but abused generally when my clothes were lost but then Parwati accused and her relations picked up a quarrel and so I suspected her. I have no quarrel with acc