The conviction of homicide was reduced to culpable homicide not amounting to murder, invoking Exception 4 of IPC due to lack of premeditation and action in a sudden quarrel.

On Board (09.04.2024) Sanjay K. Agrawal, J 1. This criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. preferred by the appellant-accused person herein is directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 17.05.2017 passed by the Learned Upper Sessions Judge, Dhamtari, District: Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh, in Sessions Trial No. 37/22016, whereby the appellant-accused has been convicted and sentenced as under:-

• All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

2. Case of the prosecution, in short, is that on 28.08.2016 at about 12:30 p.m. at village-Achhoti near Bhatapara Pond, Police Station- Kurud, District-Dhamtari (C.G.), the appellant/accused herein along with her son co-accused (minor) strangulated her husband Narendra Tandon (now deceased) to death and thereby committed the aforesaid offence.

3. It is further case of the prosecution is that the appellant herself lodged report at Police Station-Kurud, District-Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh, that on the date of offence i.e. 28.08.2016 her husband Narendra Tandon (deceased) was in drunken condition since morning and under the influence of liquor he (deceased) started quarreling with her (appellant) and thereafter, he slept on the floor and when she tried to wake him up, she found him to be dead, subsequently, she informed about the said incident to the villagers. Merg intimation was registered vide Ex.P-27 by police and Panchnama vide Ex.P-03 was prepared. FIR vide Exs.P-28 & 29 were registered against the appellant. Inquest proceedings (Ex.P5) were conducted and the dead body of the deceased was sent for postmortem. As per postmortem report (Ex.P/14), proved by Dr. U.S. Navratn (PW-05), he opined that the cause of death was asphyxia due to fracture and laceration trachea cartilage and cardio respiratory arrest and the nature of death is homicidal.

After investigation, appellant-accused was arrested vide Ex.P-11 and her memorandum statement was recorded (Ex.P/09) pursuant to which, seizure of article (Ex.P/7) was made and sent for chemical examination to FSL. In FSL report (Ex.P/35) human blood was found on Lungi (Article-A/1).

4. After due investigation, appellant was charge-sheeted for the aforesaid offence and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions for trial in accordance with law. The appellant/accused person abjured her guilt and entered into defence.

5. During the course of trial, in order to bring home the offence, the prosecution has examined as many as 19 witnesses and exhibited 35 documents. In order to prove his defence, he has not examined any witness, but exhibited 1 document. Statement of the appellant was recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. in which she denied circumstances appearing against her in prosecution case, pleaded innocence and false implication.

6. The learned trial Court after appreciating the oral and documentary evid