JUDGMENT 1. - This is a jail appeal filed by Ridmal against his convictions and sentences, under section 304, part II and 309 Indian Penal Code. Ridmal was tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge u/s 302 & 309, Indian Penal Code for the murder of his wife and for committing suicide thereafter. He was convicted under Section 309, Part II, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for three years. He was further convicted under Section 309, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years. Both the sentences were, however ordered to run concurrently. 2. The prosecution case against Ridmal was that three days before 30th April, 1972; he came to Jalore to discharge the duties of a pointsman because one of the pointsman posted at Jalore, had gone on leave. On reaching Jalore he requested his collegue within Dungar Singh to allow him to stay in his quarter, which was situated within the premises of the railway station. Dungar Singh permitted appellant to stay in his quarter Ridmal called his wife Mst. Shyama also to Jalore to live with him in the quarter. As Dungar Singh had gone away for rest to his village, the appellant & his wife & his nephew Misonia were the only persons who were living in the quarter. Dungar Singh returned from his village in the night of 9th April, 1972. He knocked at the door of his quarter. Ridmal opened the door and Dungar Singh saw that the appellant was sleeping in the quarter with his wife and his nephew. Dungar Singh, therefore, picked up a cot and came out of the quarter and slept in its compound. Ridmal closed the door and slept inside. At about 4 or 5 a.m. on 30th April,1972, he heard the sound of groaning such as 'Aaha Aaha' coming from inside the quarter. On hearing the sound, he got up and sat on his cot. Meanwhile Sumer Singh, Head Constable also came there on hearing the sound of groaning. He enquired from Dungar Singh what the matter was. Thereupon, Dungar Singh and Sumer Singh opened the door of the quarter and went inside. They saw that Ridmal appellant was sitting by the side of his wife Shyama, who was lying on the floor of the Verendah and that he was inflicting blows on her back with a knife. He enquired from Dungar Singh what the matter was. Thereupon, Dungar Singh and Sumer Singh opened the door of the quarter and went inside. They saw that Ridmal appellant was sitting by the side of his wife Shyama, who was lying on the floor of the Verendah and that he was inflicting blows on her back with a knife. Dungar Singh and his companion challenged Ridmal but the latter threatened them to kill them with the knife. Out of fear, both of them went out & closed the door. Sumer Singh rushed to inform Guman Singh Constable of the G.R.P. who was sleeping on a cot at a distance of about 30 paces from Dungar Singh's quarter. At his call, Guman Singh got up from his bed and heard about the incident from Sumer Singh. Guman Singh Constable them accompanied Dungar Singh and Sumer Singh to the quarter of Shri Vallabh Narain. Head Constable and related the incident to him. Shri Vallabh Nagrain brought a lantern from his house and came inside the quarter of Dungar Singh along with Sumer Singh. Guman Singh and Dungar Singh. All the four persons saw that Ridmal was sitting on the breast of his wife Shyama who was lying dead in the Verandah. The appellant was holding a knife in his head, with which he was trying to cut his throat. Shri Vallabh Narain and his associates asked Ridmal, why he was committing suicide. The appellant thereupon threw away the knife on the floor & stood up. He came nearer to Shri Vallabh Narain, who took him to the hospital in a Tonga, after directing the two constables of the Railway to guard the dead body of Shyama. The appellant was admitted in the hospital as an indoor patient for treatment of his injuries. Shri Vallabh Narain went to the Police Station, Jalore, & lodged a verbal report with the police on the basis of which a criminal case was registered against the appellant under sections 302 & 309. Shri Narain Singh S.H.O. Jalore started immediately for investigation. He found the dead body of Shyama & a blood stained knife lying in the quarter. He took the knife into his possession along with the blood stained shoes, Chappals & Daris & sealed them properly. Shri Narain Singh S.H.O. Jalore started immediately for investigation. He found the dead body of Shyama & a blood stained knife lying in the quarter. He took the knife into his possession along with the blood stained shoes, Chappals & Daris & sealed them properly. He sent the dead body of Shyama to hospital for post-mortem examination & after collecting other necessary evidence, put up a charge sheet against Ridmal in the court of the Munsiff Magistrate, Jalore, who, after conducting an inquiry, preparatory to commitment, committed the appellant to the courts of the Additional Sessions Judge, Jalore, for trial under Sections 302 and 309, Indian Penal Code. 3. The plea of Ridmal appellant at the trial was that he had his suspicions about the character of his wife, so he called her to Jalore. In the night, on which the occurrence took place, he expressed his desire to have a sexual intercourse with her but she did not submit herself for this purpose. He, there upon, made an attempt to have a sexual intercourse with her. She resisted and inflicted a blow on his penis with a knife. There after she caused further injuries to his stomach and to his back with the knife. The appellant tried to snatch the knife from her hand and in the course of snatching it, it struck her abdomen. There after the appellant became unconscious and could not know what happened to his wife. 4. The appellant did not produce any evidence in support of his above plea. The trial court disbelieved the version given out by the appellant and fully relied upon the evidence of the eye-witnesses led by the prosecution. It is therefore, necessary to scrutinise the prosecution evidence in order to find out whether or not the findings arrived at by the lower court as to the guilt of the appellant are correct and sound. 5. I have gone through the record and the grounds of appeal and heard the appellant in person. I heard the Deputy Government Advocate also in the presence of the appellant Upon careful review of the entire prosecution evidence, there is no escape from the conclusion that the appellant had committed the murder of his wife by stabbing her to death in the intervening night of 29th and 30th April, 1973. I heard the Deputy Government Advocate also in the presence of the appellant Upon careful review of the entire prosecution evidence, there is no escape from the conclusion that the appellant had committed the murder of his wife by stabbing her to death in the intervening night of 29th and 30th April, 1973. Dungar Singh deposed in his statement that when he entered his quarters on hearing a groaning sound coming from inside, he saw that the appellant had a knife in his right hand, with which he was giving a blow on the back of his wife, who was lying on the ground. The evidence of Dungar Singh is corroborated by the testimony of Sumer Singh who had gone with the former inside the quarter Dungar Singh and Sumer Singh have further deposed in their statements that they had challenged the appellant at that time, but he threatened them to kill with the knife. Out of fear, they came out of the quarter and after calling Guman Singh and Shri Vallabh Narain for their help, again entered it & saw that the appellant was sitting on the breast of his wife, who was lying straight with her face upward on the ground. They further saw that the appellant was inflicting blows on his neck with his knife. There upon Shri Vallabh Narain asked him not to commit suicide. The appellant threw away the knife and came nearer to Shri Vallabh Narain. Shri Vallabh Narain and Guman Singh have corroborated this latter part of the testimonies of Dungar Singh and Guman Singh in all essential details. There is no reason to discard the evidence of these eye witnesses, especially when it has not been shaken at all in cross-examination. These four eye witnesses were not inimical to the appellant. It does not appear from their evidence that they have falsely implicated the appellant in these heinous crimes. The appellant was on good term with Dungar Singh's because the latter had allowed the former to live in his quarter for some days. Dungar Singh's presence at that time cannot be doubted, because he was sleeping outside his quarter on a cot in the compound. He could naturally hear the sound of groaning coming from inside the quarter. Similarly, Sumer Singh and Guman Singh also were sleeping at some distance from the place of occurrence. Dungar Singh's presence at that time cannot be doubted, because he was sleeping outside his quarter on a cot in the compound. He could naturally hear the sound of groaning coming from inside the quarter. Similarly, Sumer Singh and Guman Singh also were sleeping at some distance from the place of occurrence. Hence, it cannot be said that the eye witnesses produced by the prosecution were chance witnesses. The trial court rightly relied upon the evidence of these four eye witnesses. 6. The plea of the appellant that he was first attacked by his wife & that his wife received injuries during the scuffle that ensued on his attempt to snatch the knife from the hands of his wife is highly incredible, because Dungar Singh, and Sumer Singh, had seen him causing injuries on the back of his wife with a knife and later on all the four eye witnesses had seen him causing injuries on his own body with the knife, while he was sitting on the breasts of the dead body of his wife. 7. I will not be out of place to mention that upon post-mortem serious stab wounds were detected on the abdomen, Scapula and other parts of the dead body of Shyama. In the opinion of the Doctor, death of Shyama occurred due to shock and haemorrhage caused by the stab-wound. It is highly improbable that as many as nine injuries could be caused to body of Shyama in the course of snatching the knife from her hand by the appellant. The appellant had led no evidence in support of his plea. His plea is not substantiated by any evidence from the side of the prosecution also. As stated above, the plea of the accused does not fit in with the probabilities of the case. Consequently, I have no hesitation in holding that it was rightly rejected by the trial Judge. 8. The result of the above discussion is that the prosecution has led cogent and unimpeachable evidence to bring guilt home to the appellant. It is fully proved by the evidence of the eye witnesses that the appellant stabbed his wife to death with a knife and that he made an attempt to commit suicide by causing injuries to the neck and other parts of his body with the same knife. It is fully proved by the evidence of the eye witnesses that the appellant stabbed his wife to death with a knife and that he made an attempt to commit suicide by causing injuries to the neck and other parts of his body with the same knife. No exception can therefore, be taken to the findings arrived at by the lower court as to his guilt under both the charges. As regards sentence, it may be observed that it is not excessive in the circumstances of the case. The appeal, therefore, has no force, and is hereby dismissed. *******