TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1952 (4) TMI 38
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....we have heard the appeal as a Court of Ordinary appeal and have gone into the evidence. 3. Two women were killed late in the night of 4th/5th August 1951. They were the wife and mother-in-law of the appellant. The two were not living in the appellant's house but in the house of the mother-in-law. There had been some estrangement between the husband and wife, and the wife was not at the time living with the appellant. 4. That the women were murdered is beyond dispute. They were savagely attacked with a sharp edged weapon and literally hacked to death. One had ten injuries on her person and the other eight. 5. The crime was first discovered by Bino Singh, P.W. 10. He says he heard cries in the night from the house of these women.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d. We say this because the First Information Report mentions the scabbard but not the knife. It is also a curious fact that the scabbard belongs to the chaukidar who made the report and not to the appellant. 8. The First Information Report states, among other things, that there was a hole in the wall of the house through which the murderer had entered. It also states that the scabbard of a Khukri was found there and that "the murderer is not yet known. It cannot be ascertained, as yet, how many persons entered and did the action". 9. Soon after this was recorded, a procession carrying two women, one dead and the, other still senseless, reached the Police Station. The appellant was among them, and the Sub-Inspector, P.W. 12, tells us t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....khukri. 12. The chaukidar corroborates this. It is clear from his statement that, after giving the first information report, he was not interrogated by the police and that he did not see them again till he met them at his house. He says: "On my return I found the police party along with the accused at my house. There I was asked by the Thana Babu to produce the Khukri which the accused had returned to me the previous night". 13. The importance of this is that the police knew that the appellant was supposed to have taken a Khukri from the chaukidar's house and returned it in the middle of the night before they reached the chaukidar's house and that they did not learn of this from the chaukidar because he had said in hi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the appellant had come to her husband's house the previous day and borrowed a Khukri despite her remonstrances. 16. It is clear that this evidence would not be sufficient for a conviction. The hole in the wall was not discovered because of anything the appellant had said nor was the Khukri. In any event, no blood stains were found on the Khukri, naturally enough, because it had been lying in water for several hours. 17. We now turn to the confession. It was made at 1-10 P.M. on the 6th but was retracted at the earliest opportunity, namely before the Committing Magistrate, and this retraction was adhered to in the Court of the Judicial Commissioner. The confession is inculpatory but corroboration is necessary because of the retract....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... P-4. In the Judicial Commissioner's Court the appellant gave the following explanation regarding the injury on his neck. He said: "The injury on the neck was due to the striking of the point fuel wood which I was cutting". In the Committing Magistrate's Court a long rambling question, mixing up a number or different facts, was put to the appellant and it is not surprising that he, getting confused, did not reply on this point. The doctor P. W. 1, however, says that the injury could have been caused by a sharply pointed dry branch of a tree. This accords with the explanation given by the appellant. Accordingly, this injury is satisfactorily accounted for. 20. In the second place, the chaukidar's wife Nangbi Devi, ....