TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1975 (9) TMI 184
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....been acquitted by the learned trial Judge. But the State of Uttar Pradesh preferred an appeal only as against the appellant, The appellant has been convicted under that section and sentenced to transportation for life. 2. The charge against the appellant, as also against the co-accused was that on the night between the 3rd and 4th June 1950 in village Tavela Garhi, P. O. Binauli, sub-district Sardhana, district Meerut, he had murdered Smt. Shivdevi in the latter's 'gher' and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 302, Indian Penal Code. The first information report had been lodged by Sub-Inspector Bishram Singh to the effect that he along with head constable Ram Bahadur Singh and constable Bhagat Singh of the Pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ffed in a sack. The appellant is said to have made a self-incriminating statement' as a result of which he was taken into custody and information sent to the police station. P. W. 15, the second officer of the police station Binauli, left for the spot eight or nine miles distant from the police station and reaching there about 10 A.M. started the investigation. He found the dead body of Shivdevi in a gunny bag in the 'kotha' inside the appellant's 'gher'. He noticed a piece of cloth (orhna) in the mouth of the dead body. He found the petticoat of a female inside the 'kotha'. He also found marks of strangulation on the neck of the deceased. The dead body was naked. That day and on the following day, i.e., 5-6....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... suspected that something nefarious was happening inside the appellant's 'gher'. The other P. Ws. then described how they entered the 'gher' and discovered the dead body of Shivdevi in circumstances leading them to infer that it was the appellant who was the perpetrator of the crime. 4. The defence of the appellant as disclosed in his examination under Section 342, Criminal Procedure Code, in the Sessions Court was that he had not taken Shivdevi from his residential house to the 'gher' that fateful night between the 3rd and 4th June, 1950. To further questions by the court he answered as follows : "I did not kill her nor was Hoshiara with me. I was not at the 'gher' and was not lying on the cot as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....#39;gher'. It is clear from his statement that Atley was arrested first and the entry into his 'gher' was effected thereafter". The learned trial Judge jumped to this con-conclusion relying upon the following statement in the cross-examination of Raja Ram, P.W. 11, who was a sarpanch and had been called by Sajawal, chowkidar, to the appellant's 'gher': "Atley accused was in custody and standing in the public path in front of the door of the 'gher'. Nobody talked to Atley in my presence". These are the opening sentences in the short cross-examination of Raja Ram, P.W. 11. It is clear that the cross-examination lawyer obtained those statements in that bald form without any reference to seque....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lusion that the appellant was found inside the 'gher' as alleged by the prosecution and that the circumstances disclosed in the evidence pointed to the conclusion that the appellant was responsible for the murder, probably aided by another person. The High Court did not examine closely the part said to have been played by Hoshiara as the State Government had not filed any appeal against him. But the learned Judges of the High Court had no doubt that so far as the appellant was concerned, the guilt for the crime had been brought home to him. 5. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the appellant that the judgment of the trial court being one of acquittal, the High Court should not have set it aside on mere appreciation of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n this connection the very cases cited at the Bar, namely, 'Surajpal Singh v. The State', ; Wilayat Khan v. State of Uttar Pradesh' . In our opinion, there is no substance in the contention raised on behalf of the appellant that the High Court was not justified in reviewing the entire evidence and coming to its own conclusions. 6. The other contentions raised on behalf of the appellant need no serious consideration because they relate to mere appreciation of evidence and do not raise any question of principle. For example, it was said that the evidence led on behalf of the prosecution did not clearly establish the motive for the crime. It was said that it was true that the deceased was the discarded wife of the appellant who ha....