Sanwala Ram vs State Of Rajasthan

Charged for having inflicted a blow on the neck of his wife using an axe on 31.05.2008 thereby causing her death the appellant has been convicted for the offence of murdering his wife vide impugned judgment dated 07.05.2016. He has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life.

Investigation was set into motion when on 31.05.2008, Babu Ram, father of the deceased reached Police Station Sarwana, District Jalore at around 2.00 p.m. and gave a written complaint Exhibit-P10 informing that his daughter Gomi was married with the appellant. For the last six months the appellant and his father were torturing his daughter on account of dowry. A month prior appellant's father accompanied by some persons had come to his house and threatened him to be ready to face the consequences if dowry was not given. His daughter expressed many times that she may be murdered. About 10 days back the appellant took his daughter back to the matrimonial house and since that day the appellant and his father had been beating his daughter. Today he received information that the appellant and his father had murdered his daughter.

But before that, events of moment had taken place. Dhuda Ram P.W.-6 a resident of the village was proceeding from Kadela to his village around 12.00 noon. As he crossed the field of one Dungar Ram he heard the shrieks of a lady. The shrieks were a cry of rescue. He saw appellant dragging his wife. He proceeded towards the two. The appellant struck a blow on the neck of his wife with an axe. She fell down. The appellant ran. Dhuda Ram raised a hue and cry. 4-5 people Chhota Ram, Jagdish, Bharmal etc. heard his shout. They chased the appellant. The appellant started inflicting injuries on himself using the axe. He was caught.

The charge-sheet filed shows that initially investigation was taken over by Manwar Alam who proceeded to the village where the appellant and the deceased resided. Dead body of the deceased was seized and sent to the mortuary for post-mortem. Dr. Prataparam Bose P.W.-3 conducted the post-mortem of the deceased on 31.05.2008 itself and drew up the post-mortem report Exhibit-P9 recording therein incised wound on the neck fracturing the spinal cord causing death. Manwar Alam also recorded the statement of Dhuda Ram P.W.-6. FIR for an offence punishable under Section 302 IPC was registered. The investigation was thereafter taken over by Inspector Ram Chandra P.W.-15 who recorded the statements of Bhagwana Ram, Mangala Ram, Babu Lal, Thakara Ram and Bhikha Ram. On 01.06.2008 the appellant was arrested as per arrest memo Exhibit-11 at 11.00 a.m. He made a disclosure statement and pursuant thereto got recovered an axe from a room used as storage for cattle and farm produces adjoining his house as recorded in the seizure memo Exhibit-P12. Naksa Moka Exhibit-P13 was thereafter prepared by the Investigating Officer. After the appellant was arrested he was got medically examined before Dr. Prataparam Bose P.W.-3 and injury report Exhibit-P8 records multiple minor incised wounds on the skull which are 14 in number. All of them are simple and have been opined to be self-inflicted incised wounds.

It is apparent that the case of the prosecution was rested upon eye-witness Dhuda Ram corroborated by two of the five persons who had chased the appellant and caught him i.e. Jagdish P.W.-1 and Bharmal P.W.-2. The link evidence is the recovery of axe pursuant to the disclosure statement recorded.

Appearing as P.W.-6 Dhuda Ram deposed facts in sync what we have noted hereinabove in para 3.

We have perused his cross-examination and indeed learned counsel for the appellant is not able to make any dent in the testimony of this witness.

Testimony of Jagdish P.W.-1 and Bharmal P.W.-2 supports the testimony of Dhuda Ram because both of them deposed that they chased the appellant who was armed with the axe. In front of them he started inflicting injuries on himself with the axe. He was dis-armed. In the process Jagdish P.W.-1 had also sustained injury, which we find is corroborated by the testimony of Dr. Prataparam Bose P.W.-3 who had given medical treatment to Jagdish. The injury report shows an incised wound and a scratch on the person of Jagdish.

We have perused the testimony and the cross-examination of P.W.1 and P.W.-2. Learned counsel for the appellant is unable to dent the testimony of the two witnesses. The position therefore would be that the testimony of Dhuda Ram as an eye-witness has been corroborated by testimony of Jagdish and Bharmal. The testimony of Jagdish and Bharmal shows that at the time when the deceased was injured. The appellant was running away from the spot where his wife was injured. He was armed with an axe. He tried to cause injuries to himself with the axe. The testimony of the three witnesses stand like a shining star. Exhibit-P8 proves simple self inflicted injuries on the appellant.

The only contention which we need to deal with is concerning recovery of the axe the next day of the crime pursuant to the disclosure statement of the appellant. It is obviously a case of over-zealous police officer trying to earn credit of making a recovery.

It is settled law that deficiency in the case of a prosecution or an infirmity in the form of over-zealousness would not dent the remaining evidence if it is credit-worthy.

In view of the testimony of P.W.-1, P.W.-2 and P.W.-6 we affirm the impugned judgment which returns a verdict of guilt against the appellant.

The appeal is dismissed.