J U D G M E N T

( 15/09/2021)

Per Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava, J.:

The instant Criminal Appeal is preferred under Section 374 of Cr.P.C. against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 12.01.2006 passed by Third Additional Sessions Judge, Gwalior in Sessions Trial No. 296/2003, whereby appellant has been convicted under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with fine of Rs.5000/-.

2. Undisputed fact of this case is that the co-accused of this case Shantibai has already been acquitted vide judgment dated

30.11.2004.

3. It is also admitted fact that the deceased Vidyabai was the married wife of the present appellant Ghanshyam and the co- accused Shantibai is the mother of accused/appellant Ghanshyam. The child witness of this case Ku. Sonali @ Guddi (PW/9) is the daughter of accused/appellant Ghanshyam and deceased Vidyabai. It is also undisputed fact that Kaushal Kishore (PW/3), Kamal Kishore (PW/5), Chandrabhan (PW/10) are the real brothers of deceased Vidyabai and Munnibai (PW/7) is the wife of Kamal Kishore (PW/5) and Ramcharan (PW/8) is the father of the deceased.

4. The prosecution story in short is that the deceased-Vidyabai is the sister of complainant Chandrabhan Jogi (PW/10). The marriage of Ghanshyam and Vidyabai was solemnized on 11.11.2002. They were residing under the same roof at Nadi Par Tal Morar. Accused/appellant Ghanshyam had sold out his house and he was interested in purchasing old Minibus, therefore, he was compelling the deceased to encash her FD and Indira Vikas Patra. But the deceased was not ready and willing to withdraw the amount against the aforesaid FDR and Indira Vikas Patra. On account of that often accused Ghanshyam and his mother Shantibai used to beat the deceased Vidyabai. Same act was done on 11.11.2002 by accused/appellant Ghanshyam and his mother with deceased Vidyabai. Deceased-Vidyabai informed about the aforesaid torturous behaviour of her husband Ghanshyam and mother-in-law Shantibai to her family members and asked them to come her residence. The complainant Chandrabhan Jogi (PW/10) reached the house of the deceased along with his friends Brijesh Gupta (PW/4), Rajkumar (PW/6) and Raju Goswami (PW/12). They saw that Shantibai was quarreling with the deceased Vidyabai and accused- Ghanshyam was also beating the deceased. The complainant and his friends tried to settle the matter and requested to send his sister Vidyabai along with him. But the accused had not permitted Vidyabai to go along with her brother. At around 2:30 pm the complainant and his friends were returned back. When they reached out of the house of the accused they heard the sound of firing from the house of Ghanshyam. They immediately returned back and had seen that accused Ghanshyam was trying to escape from the place of incident and his sister Vidyabai was found dead. Her body was blood stained and the other accused Shantibai was not there. The niece of the complainant Sonali @ Guddi (PW/9) was weeping there and she conveyed that ^^fd mlds ikik us eEeh dks ekj fn;k^^A It is further stated in the FIR that due to dispute with regard to money, the deceased was murdered using firearm by Ghanshyam. The gunshot injury was found over the head of the deceased. On account of that FIR was lodged i.e. (Ex-P/4). As per aforesaid complaint Merg No.61/2002 was registered i.e. (Ex-P/10). Safina form (Ex-P/6), spot map (Ex-P/7) were prepared. The postmortem of the deceased was conducted by Dr. Y.S. Kushwah (PW/15). The postmortem report is Ex-P/9, wherein the doctor has opined that the deceased Vidyabai died due to excessive hemorrhage from gunshot injury. During the investigation, S.B. Sharma (PW/14) recorded the statements of Kaushal Kishore (PW/3), Kamal Kishore (PW/5), Rajkumar (PW/6), Munnibai (PW/7), Sonali @ Guddi (PW/9), Chandrabhan (PW/10), Brijesh Gupta (PW/4), Ramchandra (PW/8), Uma Devi, Munnalal (PW/1), Ahibaran Singh (PW/2), Omprakash (PW/13) and Kamal Singh. After completion of investigation, charge