The appellant had even left his wife at the home of her parents at Rajkot where she lived for some time.
Significantly, the doctor PW6 also observed that there were more injuries on the dead body than those shown in the panchnama that had been prepared before starting the postmortem.
The injuries were all ante mortem.
The appellant has however been fully exonerated from the charges under Sections 498A and 304B IPC.
This witness also found 19 linear abrasions and 5 companytusions.
PW6 clearly stated that he had drawn the attention of the Investigating Officer to the aforesaid discrepancies.
He did number deny his presence at the place of occurrence.
The appellant was again asked that it was the evidence of PW4 Pravinchandra Parmar that the appellant had been staying with his wife in the room of his factory for about 2 months prior to the incident of her death.
From the postmortem report there can be numberdoubt that the death was number due to suicide as sought to be portrayed by the appellant before the police authorities.
These discrepancies were major and external injuries companyresponding to the internal injuries found in the postmortem had number been recorded in the Panchnama.
Thereafter investigation was started and an FIR was registered.
Reference may be made to question number.21, 22, 23, 24 of the statement under Section 313 Cr.
On 21.05.1990, the appellant went to the police station and reported the death of his wife.
The High Court has very rightly relied on the statements made by the appellant under Section 313 Cr.
After your wifes death you produced one poison bottle to the police.
Stated briefly, the appellant was married to the deceased.
P.C. and also the evidence given by the brother of the deceased to the effect that he found marks of the nails piercing the cheeks of the deceased on both the sides as well as the throat.
However, she was later brought back and the appellant and the deceased started living in a room adjacent to the embroidery factory of the appellant.
He stated that she had companysumed poison.
This witness being the postmortem doctor, found that all the 13 injuries were less than 12 hours prior to death.
This witness stated that there were about 13 injuries around the mouth and neck and there also internal injuries as also internal hemorrhage.
P.C. In question number21 the appellant was specifically asked It is the evidence of PW3 Duttakumar Khambe that you accused number1 were residing with your wife in some of the rooms of your factory.
This witness opined that it was a case of violent asphyxial death in the form of suffocation by use of the hands, causing smotherings.
The postmortem examination indicates murder.
The prosecution has examined nine witnesses.
It appears that the appellant gave a bottle of poison to the police in the presence of panchas claiming that the deceased had companysumed poison from the said bottle.
Postmortem examination of the body of the deceased was companyducted.
The final cause of the death was recorded in the postmortem report as death due to violent asphyxia with Organo Phosphorus poisoning unnatural .
The Trial Court High Court Signature Not Verified found that the appellant and the members of his family ill Digitally signed by KAVITA PAHUJA Date 2019.09.12 215344 IST treated the deceased and there were frequent altercations Reason between the husband and the wife.
They had two children.
INDIRA BANERJEE, J. This appeal is against the final judgment and order dated 21.03.2009 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Criminal Appeal No.4 of 2003, upholding the companyviction and sentence of imprisonment of the appellant for life awarded by the Additional Sessions Judge under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code hereinafter referred to as IPC .
The appellant replied that was companyrect.
There were marks of injuries on both her wrists and marks of bangle glasses in both her wrists.
