A lungi was recovered from the appellants room as produced by him.
After the receipt of result of the autopsy, it was companyfirmed that Sujatha died due to strangulation.
First Information Report was lodged by PW 1, the brother of the deceased and it was registered as a case of unnatural death.
PW 6 Bahulayan is the father of the accused.
Parties are heard at length.
It is also alleged that at about 2.30 a.m., the accused had woken up the inmates of the house and disclosed to them that his wife was missing and in a hectic search that followed, the body of the deceased was spotted inside the well and was brought out from the well.
It appears that the deceased had adopted the same stiff attitude towards the accused on the second night also i.e. 3.2.1993, which had enraged the accused.
oblique, parallel to each other 0.5 cm.
The deceased companyld number tolerate the information so elicited about the extra marital companynection of her husband with Omana.
The appellants father when examined as P.W.6 said that the appellant had told him at 2.30 a.m. that the deceased was dead.
PW 4 Sasidharan is the husband of PW 3 and elder brother of the accused who was declared hostile.
On being unable to sustain the lust for sex, persistently prevented by the deceased, the accused decided to end the life of the deceased, strangulated her and killed her.
The case of the prosecution entirely rests on circumstantial evidence.
The FIR was, accordingly, companyverted into a case of murder.
Thereafter, the companyple stayed together in the parental house of the bridegroom.
Criminal Appeal No.
Criminal Appeal No.
After the trial, the learned Trial Judge, held the accused guilty under Section 302 IPC and imposed the extreme penalty of death sentence.
Pressure abrasion, 9.5 cm.
1 and 2 are sufficient in the ordinary companyrse of nature to cause the death.
P.C. he had stated that there was numberattempt on his part to have sexual relationship with Sujatha, but companyceded later by saying that he had sexual inter course with her.
PW 5 Rathesh Kumar was also declared hostile.
She became repulsive and adopted an unresponsive attitude towards the overture approach made by the accused and she succeeded by keeping him at bay on the bridal night.
In this case the prosecution has examined as many as 15 witnesses.
below and 3 cm behind the right ear 1.8 cm.
long, oblique, on the front and left side of neck, inner lower end being 1.5 cm below thyroid cartilage and in the midline 1.4 cm.
long, horizontal, on the front and right side of neck, inner end in the midline, over thyroid cartilage, 9 cm.
On appeal, the High Court set aside the companyviction and sentence and acquitted him.
626 of 1994 and R.T.No.2 of 1994 and are being disposed of by this companymon judgment.
Doctor further opined that injury No.3 is possible to be caused by that portion companying into companytact with the top of a nail.
None of the DWs were examined on behalf of the accused.
PW 2 Omana is a lady who was alleged to have had extra marital relation with the accused was declared hostile.
J U D G M E N T WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.
The facts of this case as unfolded by the prosecution are brief but horrendous, which shock human companyscience.
PW.13 also found that hymen showed a tear in the 5o clock position whose margins were reddish.
broad .
apart, on the front of middle of neck, 0.5 cm.
The deceased seems to have elicited information from PW 3 Lekha, wife of the younger brother of the accused, that the accused had a pre marital affair with one Omana Vavachi PW 2 .
The appellant and deceased were closeted in a bedroom at about 8.30 p.m. on the fateful day.
270 is preferred by the defacto companyplainant PW 1 , the brother of the deceased.
271 is preferred by the State of Kerala.
broad and outer upper end being 6 cm.
Dr.Sujathan was examined as P.W.13.
PW 3, Lekha is the wife of the accuseds elder brother.
The marriage of the deceased Sujatha with accused Babu was solemnised on 2.2.1993.
In the opinion of doctor, injury number.
The High Court has companysidered the following circumstances appearing against the accused Sujatha died of murder and the dead body was in a well situated about 17 metres away from the house.
below and 2.5 cm.
1 and 2 companyld be caused by applying force on the neck by tying a Kayali Lungi on the neck.
behind the left ear 1.5 cm broad Linear abrasions, 1.3 cm.
and 0.8 cm.
Doctor further opined that injury number.
Thereafter, the body of the deceased was lifted and taken to an unused well, situated about 17 metres away from the house of the accused and dumped.
271/1996 Sema, J. These two appeals arise out of a companymon judgment and order of the High Court dated 29.11.1994 passed in Criminal Appeal No.
Doctor opined that the deceased had died of companystriction force around the neck.
She stated that she had companyducted autopsy and found the following ante mortem injuries Pressure abrasion, 11 cm.
below injury No.2.
behind the chin 1.5 cm broad , and outer end 7 cm.
When the appellant was questioned by the Sessions Judge under Section 313 Cr.
