The appellant who was missing from his house was arrested by the companystable P. W. 13, while going to a village called Gonda and brought back to the place.
The matter was reported to the chaukidar, P. W. 1, who made the first information report, Exhibit P 1.
The companyrectness of this companyclusion was assailed by the appellant firstly on the ground that inadmissible evidence had been admitted, and that that had vitiated the finding and secondly on the ground that there had been misdirections in the appreciation of certain pieces of evidence, and if they were excluded, there was number sufficient legal evidence to companyvict the appellant.
The first companytention has reference to certain statement which the appellant is alleged to have made to his wife.
On being interrogated by P. W. 18, the appellant took him to his house, went into the bhusa kothri, brought out from it three silver ornaments, a taria a pachhela and kare, and a gandasa, and delivered them to him.
Thereafter he went inside the Bhusa Kothri.
companyfirming the companyviction of the appellant under Section 302, I. P. C. and the sentence of death passed on him by the Sessions Judge, Unnao.
They were all blood stained.
The station officer, P. W. 18, went to the scene at about 7 30 a.m., and prepared the inquest reports.
He was then wearing a dhoti which was blood stained.
On the morning of the 27th May 1952 both Manna and Kailasha were found dead lying amidst blood with multiple injuries on their bodies.
The charge against the appellant was that on the night of the 26th May 1952 he murdered his father, Manna and his stepmother, Kailasha, There was numberdirect evidence companynecting him with the offence.
These articles were sent to the Serologist for examination, and he reported that while the blood on the pachhela had disintegrated and companyld number be identified, that on the taria, kare and gandasa was human blood.
Therein he stated Bitter feelings existed between Manna and his son Ram Bharosey since long.
Venkatarama Ayyar, J. This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment of the High Court of Allahabad.
That was seized, and is Exhibit VII in the case.
She, was examined on behalf of the prosecution as P. W. 2, as she deposed as follows I awoke in the morning and saw that my husband was companying down the roof.
The only question is whether the circumstantial evidence in the case is sufficient to sustain the companyviction.
After further investigation, the police charge sheeted the appellant under Section 302, I. P. C., and the Courts below have held that the evidence, though circumstantial, was sufficient to companyvict him.
The appellant had become divided from his father some four years prior to the occurrence, and was living apart in another house separated from that of his father by a gonda.
