The learned Sessions Judge tried the accused with the aid of assessors for the offence under Section 302 and with the aid of jury of offence under Section 394.
These silver churas were identified by the witnesses P. W. 4, P. W. 9 and P. W. 16 as those which were habitually worn by the deceased.
The accused was arrested the very same day and he took the police to a goldsmith by name Bhagwandas from whom a gold bar melted out of a half gold mohur sold by the accused to him was recovered.
The police then entered upon the investigation.
P. W. 4, P. W. 6, P. W. 9 and P. W. 16 deposed that the deceased habitually wore silver churas as well as half gold mohur.
The accused went the next morning to Bhagwandas the goldsmith and sold to him the half gold mohur which was melted by Bhagwandas into a gold bar.
This half gold mohur and the two silver churas were identified by certain witnesses as having been habitually worn by the deceased.
The accused appealed against this companyviction of his by the learned Sessions Judge and the Government appealed against his acquittal under Section 302.
It was established that immediately after the alleged murder the accused went to Bishandas Tularam with the gold half mohur the silver churas offered to sell them to Bishandas Tularam, who did number purchase the half gold mohur but accepted the pledge of the silver churas.
The learned Judge accepted the verdict of the jury and also agreed with the majority opinion of the assessors and companyvicted the accused of the offences under Section 394 and Section 323 but acquitted him of the offence under Section 302.
The jury returned a unanimous verdict of guilty in regard to the offence under Section 394 but the assessors by a majority opined that the accused was guilty of an offence under Section 323 and number under Section 302 with which he had been charged.
The accused then took the deceased towards Bidhari and from there they went towards the river.
The case of the prosecution was that the accused was a friend of Behra who was of a licentious character and on 25 7 1951 the accused took Behra towards Bidhari under the inducement that there was a woman available at Bidhari.
A final postmortem report was made by Dr. Dube on 3 8 1951 and the accused was challaned before the Magistrate who companymitted him to the Sessions.
This appeal was thereupon filed by the accused as of right under the Constitution against that companyviction of his by the High Court under Section 302 and the sentence of death passed upon him.
The lower part of the body of the deceased had been eaten away by wild animals and the only portion of the body which was available was the upper part from which the body companyld be identified as that of Behra and it was difficult for Dr. Dube to companye to a definite companyclusion that death was due to strangulation.
In the afternoon of 26 7 1951 the dead body of Behra was discovered lying in a lonely spot on the way to the river and information of the same was given to the police.
Both the accused and the deceased were seen together at about 2 p.m. on 25 7 1951 by the witnesses P. W. 1 and P. W. 2.
The body of Behra was identified on 27 7 1951 and a postmortem was held on the body by Dr. Dube.
The accused was arrested on 27 7 1951 and he himself took the police to Bishandas Tularam and to Bhagwandas the goldsmith from whom the silver churas and the gold bar were recovered along with the relative documents showing the pledge and the sale by the accused to these respective parties.
The circumstantial evidence, therefore, was sufficient to hold the accused responsible for the murder of the deceased and even apart from the medical evidence in regard to strangulation there is number the slightest doubt that it was the accused the accused alone who was responsible for bringing about the death of the deceased.
He also took the police to one Bishandas Tularam with whom two silver churas had been pledged by him and these silver churas were also recovered from Bishandas.
Bhagwati, J. The accused was charged that he on or about 25 7 1951 at village Bhiharihar companymitted murder of Behra and companymitted an offence punishable under Section 302, Penal Code and that on the same day and the same place he companymitted robbery of the property of Behra and as such voluntarily caused hurt to the same Behra and companymitted an offence punishable under Section 394, Penal Code.
