JUDGMENT 1. This is a reference made by the Sessions Judge of Rajshahi under sec. 307, Cr. P. C. The accused was tried by jury on a charge under sec. 302, I. P. C., of the murder of his own wife on the 29th of April 1914. Out of the 5 jurors, four were of opinion that the accused was not guilty and one of them was of opinion that the accused was guilty. The learned Sessions Judge, not finding himself in a position to accept the verdict of the majority of the jury and thinking that for the ends of justice the matter should be referred to this Court, has done so under sec. 307, Cr. P. C. The facts of the case are these : On the date of the occurrence the accused was seen assaulting his wife outside his house and pushing her inside the house. The neighbour witnesses say that they actually heard the woman crying from inside the house that she was being killed. When the people arrived, they wanted to rescue the woman and at last the husband was separated from the wife. They found the wife in an unconscious state. They tried to give her water, but the woman could not drink. The people thought that she was dead. Then it appears that the accused again went inside the house, turned out one or two persons who were inside the house and shut the door. Before this the woman was lying on the ground, but after the accused re-entered the house, people discovered that this woman was hanging by the neck by a piece of string tied to the roof of the house. On this the accused was sent up for trial. 2. It appears that soon after the occurrence the accused admitted to one Sharafat, a witness for the prosecution, that he had killed his wife, because she was carrying on an intrigue with one Madari. It also appeals that the accused made a statement before a Judicial officer some days later. Therein also he made a similar statement. 3. The question now is what offence he has committed. But before we come to answer that question, it is necessary to ascertain from the medical evidence the probable cause of the death of this woman. The medical evidence shows that she most probably died of hanging. Therein also he made a similar statement. 3. The question now is what offence he has committed. But before we come to answer that question, it is necessary to ascertain from the medical evidence the probable cause of the death of this woman. The medical evidence shows that she most probably died of hanging. There can be no doubt that her body was suspended by a rope by the husband, the present accused. The question is whether he at the time intended to kill her. The people thought her dead when she was slapped and kicked in the region of abdomen and, no doubt, the accused also thought that she was dead. When for the second time he entered into the house, most likely in order to create an appearance that the woman had committed suicide he took up the unconscious body of his wife, thinking it to be a dead body, and hung it up by a rope. Therefore he could not have intended to kill her, if he thought that the woman was already dead. We have therefore to fall back on what happened at the earlier stage of the occurrence when the accused gave the deceased kicks, blows and slaps. No doubt the kicks were given below the navel, a place where it is most especially dangerous to kick a woman. She fell down and became unconscious. The offence, therefore, that the accused committed was an offence under sec. 325, I. P. C. Under the circumstances of the case we are of opinion that he cannot be convicted of murder, but of an offence under sec. 325, I. P. C., only. We, therefore, convict him under that section, and sentence him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years.