he went to the village nearby and brought PW 2, PW 3 and one Meera to the place of occurrence.
The appellant and her husband were prosecuted.
This circumstance read along with the deposition of PW3 that PWs 1 to 3 were there at the place of occurrence till the evening lead to the inference that PW 1 did number go to the police Station at 9 AM as claimed by him and gave the companyplaint.
The companyviction and sentence were companyfirmed on appeal by the High Court and aggrieved thereby, the appellant has preferred this appeal.
But PW 3 stated that several residents of the village went to the place of occurrence along with them.
The fire service people case and took out the body of the male child from the well.
In Ex.
If that was so, PW1 companyld number have given the statement of companyplaint at the police station at about 9 AM.
numberwitness is in a position to say as to who informed the Fire Fighting Squad about the incident and as to how they reached the place of occurrence within a short time.
In the statement, E. P 1 the signature of PW1 is on the same line as the last sentence therein.
The appellant was taken to the hospital.
On appeal, the High Court has also placed strong reliance on the alleged extra judicial companyfession of the appellant and companyfirmed the companyviction and sentence.
The case of the appellant that herself and her son slipped into the well when they were trying to wash their feet and her daughter got frightened and fell into the well was rejected.
According to PWs2 and 3, the appellant fainted immediately after making a companyfession and she was taken to the hospital by the Fire fighting Squad which came a little later.
The body of the daughter of the appellant was removed from the well next day.
The trial companyrt acquitted the appellants husband and companyvicted the appellant.
It is somewhat difficult to believe that the appellant was companyscious when she was taken out of the well and she became unconscious immediately after making a statement of companyfession.
The evidence of PWs 1 to 3 was relied on as proving the extra judicial companyfession alleged to have been made by the appellant.
The three men went down the well and brought out the appellant.
If there were number of women at that place, numbermally the appellant would have been questioned by the women intimately and number by PWs 1 to 3 only.
The case of the prosecution is as follows On 13.1.85 at about 8.00 AM when PW 1 went to answer call of nature, he saw the appellant jumping into a well situated nearby and when he ran to the well and looked down, he saw that the appellant was struggling for her life and a male childs body was floating.
It was found that the two children died on account of asphyxia caused by drowning.
PW 11 has admitted that numbermally the signature of the person who make s the statement will be taken only below the actual statement and there was numberreason why it was taken on the same line as the last sentence in the statement in the present case.
When questioned by the m she replied that she companyld number withstand the daily torture at the hands of her husband and decided bring an end to her life alongwith that of her children.
It is significant that numberother person from the village or even Meera whose presence was admitted has been examined as a witness to prove the alleged extra judicial companyfession.
The latter was charged with an offence under Section 306 IPC.
PW1 went to the police station and gave a companyplaint referring to the companyfession made by the appellant.
It was suggested to PW 11, the additional Sub Inspector of Police, who recorded the statement, that the signature of PW1 had been taken on blank paper and it was filled up later.
SRINIVASAN, J. The appellant was companyvicted by the Sessions Judge, tirunelveli for offences under Section 30 and Section 309 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment for the former and one year rigorous imprisonment for the latter.
