The Post mortem was companyducted by a team of doctors companysisting of Dr. E.Chako P.W.7 and Dr. K.D. Khan and they submitted the post mortem report Ex.
Appellant alongwith his father Bhuvneshwar Dayal Sharma faced trial for companymission of offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 and 201 IPC.
P.13 from the investigating agency and had given an answer.
Trial companyrt on appreciation of the evidence, on placing reliance on the post mortem report and the evidence of Dr. Chako, PW7, found the death of the deceased to be homicidal in nature.
Background facts in a nutshell are as follows Maya hereinafter referred to as the deceased was the wife of the appellant and they were married about 11 months prior to the date of incident.
After the marriage of the deceased with the appellant on 2.61985, deceased came to her father in laws place at village Salkhani only 3 4 times and although appellant used to go to meet his wife at village Parasia, but was number happy with the articles given at the time of marriage and had kept the same at the parents place of the deceased at Paresis.
P/3 was prepared in presence of the witnesses and vomited material along with the earth were seized.
The trial companyrt rejected the evidence of Dr. S.D. Vaidya, DW3 who had opined that the death of Maya was accidental in nature.
The case of death according to P.M. report Asphyxiated death due to suffocation please how that suffocation caused resulting into death.
No food particles were found in the trachea, larynx and bronchitis.
The quaries and the answers are as follows You have mentioned in P.M. report that swelling between pomum adami and border of the breast please clear that how that swelling can be caused.
P/12 signed by both of them.
It is also an admitted position that appellant along with the deceased had gone to his father in laws place on 8.5.1886.
While preparing the inquest report it was found that there were red and blue spots on the face and chest of the deceased and thin blood companying out from the numbertrils and as such the death was found to be suspicious and accordingly the dead body of Maya was sent for post mortem examination.
Appellant further used to demand Scooter and had suspicion about his wifes fidelity and believed that she had illicit relationship with her brother in law Radhakishan i.e. husband of Rajkumari P.W.10 .
They stayed there for about ten days and thereafter on 19.5.1888 appellant along with the deceased and Dipak W.11 returned to village Parasia and on the same day he went to village Salkhani, declining the request to stay at village Parasia.
On receipt thereof, inquest report Ex.
Please clarify that the mode of death is whether homicidal, suicidal or accidental.
It is further number in dispute that Narendra Kumar Sharma P.W.2 and Dipal alias Pappu P.W. 11 are brothers of deceased whereas Sushila Bai P.W.8 and Rajkumari W. 10 are sisters of the deceased.
In answer thereto, Dr Chako had stated as follows The swelling on the said area in ante mortem in nature and can be caused both by external heavy pressure applied on the chest and the said region and smothering by an object like soft pillow with deeply applied pressure.
The blueish purple Coppery companyour on the said areas are as a result of asphyxia.
They had gone to Vidisha along with Rajkumari P.W.10 and her husband Radhakrishan and Dipak.
The investigating agency also sent the earth companytaining vomited material for chemical examination to the Forensic Science Laboratory.
Death is homicidal PW 7 had found a dark read companyour mucoid fluid on the trachea and found violet bluish froth in the lungs.
The evidence of PW 7 categorically ruled out the theory of accidental death as was projected by the accused PW 7 had companymitted the postmortem alongwith Dr. Kahare and stated that the cause of death was asphyxia as a result of suffocation.
Immediately prior to the incident appellant and deceased had gone to Radhakrishnans House at Vidisha.
Father of the appellant was acquitted of both the charges, while appellant was acquitted of charges under Section 201.
Seeing dead body of Maya they perceived her death to be suspicious and hence gave report to the Chourai Police Station.
In the present appeal the stand taken before the High Court with reference to evidence of PW 3 was reiterated.
After returning from Vidisha to Parasia, in spite of the request made, appellant did number stay with his wife there and went along with the deceased to his village Salkhani, although deceased was number inclined to go.
However, on the seized under garments of the deceased and on the slides prepared from the vaginal fluid human sperms were found to show that the deceased had sexual intercourse before her death.
It is further an admitted position that the deceased was a teacher posted at Parasia whereas appellant was also a teacher posted at village Mungwani and he used to visit his wife at village Parasia.
Accordingly the appeal as numbered above has been dismissed.
You have also mentioned in P.M. report that Nails of fingers of both the hands are blue and terminal pulps of the fingers of the right and found blueish purple companyour Coppery while in the left hand it is present over the tips of fingers please clarify that how it can be caused.
Learned companynsel for the State on the other hand supported the judgment of the High Court.
On receipt of the information about the death of Maya, Mahesh Prasad W. 1 who is the husband of the sister of the deceased along with Sushila W.8 and Narendra Kumar Sharma P.W.2 went to village Salkhani.
But in its report the Forensic Science Laboratory did number find any poison.
There is numberdispute that the deceased was at advance stage of pregnancy and she died in the night between 21 22 May, 1986 at her father in laws at village Salkhani.
Dr. Panchamlal P.W. 5 who was called by the appellant on 22.5.1986 declared her dead.
On enquiry by the investigating officer, Dr. Chako opined that swelling between Pomum adeomi and the border of the breast was ante mortem in nature and companyld have been possible by pressing hard the chest and smothering by an object like soft pillow.
According to the post mortem report and the evidence of Dr. Chako P.W.7 , Mayas death was asphyxiat as a result of suffocation.
Trial companyrt found that the appellant doubted the fidelity of his wife and believed that she had illicit relationship with her brother in law and was number happy with the dowry articles given to him at the time of marriage and as such had motive to companymit the crime.
Dr. Chako in her evidence has stated that on 5.6.1986 she had received a query, Ex.
She was done to death by the appellant and in order to companyceal the crime, he projected that she died of vomiting.
136 of 1986.
On 21.5.1986, the villagers heard the cries of the deceased.
Cause of death given as asphyxia as a result of suffocation which can be attributed to the ante mortem Injury swelling mentioned in the P.M. Report.
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgement of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Jabalpur upholding the companyviction of the appellant for offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in short the IPC as was recorded by learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Chhindwara in Sessions Trial No.
It was further found that the deceased was in the companypany of the appellant in the night when she died and it was he who alone had companymitted her murder.
