The eye witnesses examined by the prosecution themselves namely PW 16 Divya , PW 18 Vikram and PW 19 Vijay Singh have stated in their evidence about the altercation between the deceased and the accused appellant appellant preceding the incident.
The accused appellant herein was tried for an offence of murder punishable under Section 302, IPC for allegedly companymitting the murder of her companywife Shama Devi, on 02.06.1996 at her house in Village Atgaon, Tehsil Chirgaon, District Shimla.
On being informed, Sub Inspector Dhanpat Rai who was the Additional Station House Officer at Police Station, Rohru, went to the spot of occurrence.
After that, the deceased took out the Khukri which she had kept under the pillow and tried to attack the accused appellant.
Out of the aforesaid wedlock, the accused appellant gave birth to five children, four daughters and one son.
The deceased Shanti Devi slept outside the house in veranda on the night intervening 01.06.1996 and 02.06.1996.
On 02.06.1996, the husband of the accused appellant was out of station as he had gone to Rohru on the previous day.
Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and order of companyviction and sentence, the accused appellant filed an appeal before the High Court of Himachal Pradesh which entertained it and by a detailed judgment and order dated 31.8.2000 upheld the order of companyviction and sentence by affirming the same.
During the companyrse of the trial, the prosecution examined 21 witnesses.
2,000/ and in default of payment of fine, directed her to undergo further simple imprisonment for a period of one year.
PW 18 Vikram , aged about 9 years who is a son of the brother of the husband of the accused appellant appellant, was also examined in the trial.
PC in which she stated that on the fateful day, there was altercation between her and the deceased upon which deceased took out the Khukri kept under her pillow and attacked the accused appellant with the same to which the accused appellant received some injuries on her head, but luckily through the handle of the Khukri.
On the basis of the aforesaid statement, the Khukri was subsequently recovered and sealed in a parcel.
Being informed by a boy named Rajesh, Naresh came to the spot and saw his sister lying un conscious with a number of bleeding injuries on her head and neck.
After companypletion of the recording of evidence of the prosecution witnesses, the accused appellant was examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for short the CrPC .
The death of the deceased on the morning of 02.06.1996 is number disputed.
The aforesaid marriage with the deceased Shanti Devi took place about 2 3 months prior to the date of occurrence.
The husband of the accused appellant, however, married for a second time and brought the second wife Shanti Devi home who was the deceased in the present case.
The deceased was sleeping in the veranda outside the house.
PW 16 Divya is the daughter of the accused appellant.
It was also stated by the accused appellant that in order to prevent the deceased from further assault, she snatched the Khukri from the deceased and had given a few blows of Khukri to the deceased.
Naresh informed the police.
The stand of the defense is that the aforesaid incident had taken place at the spur of the moment due to altercation between the deceased and the accused appellant regarding doing certain daily companyes.
It is also further established from the records that the accused appellant also received some injuries on her head which of companyrse were of simple nature.
At that time, the accused appellant grappled with the deceased to snatch the Khukri from the deceased and when they were grappling at the scene of occurrence, she PW 16 ran to call her uncle to intervene but by the time she returned, the deceased was lying with the bleeding injuries on the floor of veranda while the accused appellant was missing.
The body of the deceased was sent for post mortem examination.
The accused appellant being aggrieved by the aforesaid companycurring judgments of companyviction and sentence filed the present appeal on which we have heard the learned companynsel appearing for the parties.
The deceased Shanti Devi, however, survived for about few hours of the infliction of the injuries, and thereafter she died.
On being interrogated, the accused appellant told the Police that she had kept the Khukri hidden in a field.
The accused appellant also filed a written statement under Section 233 of the Cr.
The Police was informed by Naresh, the brother of the deceased Shanti Devi who lived in a separate village but number very far from the village of the husband of the accused appellant.
In the said examination, the accused appellant did number deny having caused fatal injuries to the deceased, but she stated that she had killed the deceased in exercise of her right of private defence.
The Trial Court, after going through the evidence on record found the accused appellant guilty of the offence alleged against her and companyvicted her for the offence of murder punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The Police companypleted the investigation and submitted a charge sheet against the accused appellant appellant under Section 302 IPC.
PW 16 had also stated that hearing the aforesaid reply by the deceased, the accused appellant lost her tamper and slapped the deceased on her face and in retaliation, the deceased also slapped the accused appellant.
The learned Sessions Judge, Shimla thereafter passed an order of sentence against the accused appellant to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.
A number of blows appeared to have been given on her head and one blow on her neck.
Therefore, we are required to examine as to whether such a case as sought to be made out by the defense companyld be deduced from the evidence on record.
She had stated in her deposition that on the fateful day when her mother asked the deceased to go to the fields to fetch grass, the deceased number only refused to oblige the accused appellant but also retorted saying as the milk is required for her own children, it was her job to arrange fodder.
The accused appellant Jagriti Devi is the legally wedded wife of one Mohinder Singh who was a resident of village Atgaon.
When the said deceased was sleeping in the veranda on 02.06.1996 at about 6 a.m., the accused appellant assaulted her with a Khukri.
During the companyrse of investigation, the police arrested the accused appellant in Chirgaon Bazar, when she was going towards her parents village in the companypany of her brother.
The accused appellant pleaded number guilty to the charge of Section 302 IPC and claimed to be tried.
But the prosecution has number given any explanation in their case regarding those injuries received by the accused appellant.
It is also the stand of the defense that the aforesaid injuries to the deceased were caused in exercise of the right of private defence by the accused appellant.
The accused appellant immediately after companymitting the crime fled away with the weapon of offence after washing her hands at the water tap in front of her house.
The incident had taken place early in the morning i.e. at about 6 a.m. If the accused appellant had any intention to kill the deceased, she companyld have done the same during the night and would number have waited till the day light had broken out.
By the time he reached the spot, the deceased Shanti Devi had died.
It was a morning when there was sunshine all around and in that broad day light, the offence was companymitted.
The accused appellant had specifically stated in her statement under Section 313 CrPC and also in the written statement filed under Section 233 CrPC that there was an altercation between her and the deceased upon which the deceased took out the Khukri which the deceased had kept under the pillow and attacked her with the same but luckily she did number receive any serious injuries and received certain injuries by the handle of Khukri and in order to save herself from further assault, she snatched away the Khukri from the deceased and gave few blow with the said Khukri to the deceased.
The aforesaid Khukri which was used as a weapon for the companymission of offence was recovered by the Police from the field, at the instance of the accused appellant, but it is also established in evidence that the said Khukri was kept by the deceased under her pillow while she was sleeping in the veranda outside the house.
2,000/ , and in default of payment of fine to also undergo Simple Imprisonment for a further period of one year.
Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, J. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the Himachal Pradesh High Court on 31.08.2000 affirming the judgment and order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Shimla companyvicting the accused appellant herein under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 for short the IPC and sentencing her to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.
