Section 106 of the Evidence Act cannot be used to shift the burden of proof until the prosecution first discharges its initial duty of proving foundational facts. Once initial guilt is established via circumstantial evidence in custodial settings, the accused must offer a plausible explanation for the death.

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI)

1. The present case arises from Sessions Case No. 19/2015, decided by the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Godhra, whereby the appellant-accused Pareshbhai Shankarbhai Taviyad was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 182 IPC. The 4th Additional Sessions Judge sentenced the accused to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine, in default to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 IPC. The substantive sentence was ordered to run as per law.

2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 20/09/2014 around 6:00 PM in the evening, at the Forest Quarters near G.E.B. office in Santarampur, the deceased Rekhaben wife of Pareshbhai Shankarbhai Taviyad was residing with her husband, who is employed in the Forest Department. There were frequent quarrels between the husband and wife over domestic issues, which the deceased used to confide in her parents and others. On the fateful day, in the course of such a quarrel, the accused allegedly strangulated his wife Rekhaben with a cotton dori/string/rope, causing asphyxia and death. To screen himself from punishment and mislead the authorities, the accused staged the scene as suicide by hanging, tied the dori/string/rope in a manner suggesting self-hanging, and immediately went to Santarampur Police Station to lodge a false report that his wife had committed suicide by hanging after 6:00 PM. This false information was recorded as Accidental Death No. 31/2014. The next day, the father of the deceased, Hirabhai Ramabhai Sangada-complainant, who is a retired police personnel, lodged a complaint before the Deputy Superintendent of Police at Santarampur Police Station, alleging that the death was homicidal, that the accused had quarreled with Rekha, strangled her, and falsely reported it as suicide to evade law. It is the case of the prosecution that the accused, with the intention and knowledge that strangulation with a dori/string/rope on the neck was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death, intentionally caused the death of Rekhaben and gave false information to the police, thereby committing offences punishable under Sections 302 and 182 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Upon registration of the FIR at Santarampur Police Station under Sections 302 and 182 IPC, the investigation was carried out by the concerned police officer. The scene of offence was visited, panchnama was prepared in presence of panch witnesses, inquest was conducted, postmortem was arranged at Santarampur State Hospital where medical officers opined homicidal death due to strangulation by dori/string/rope, statements of material witnesses including family members, neighbors, Forest Colony employees, and medical officer were recorded, the dori/string/rope-muddamal was recovered and seized at the instance of the accused, articles were sent to F.S.L. for examination. After receipt of F.S.L. report and finding sufficient evidence, the accused was arrested. On completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Santarampur, where it was registered and thereafter committed to the Court of Sessions, Godhra under Section 209 CrPC, a