Judgment O. N. Asthana, J. 1. This is the criminal Appeal against the judgment and order of 1st Additional Sessions judge, Muzaffarpur dated 12th March, 1985 in Sessions trial No.53 of 1985/7 of 1984 (State v Akbar All and three others), where the Trial Court held this accused-appellant Akbar Ali guilty for the commission of offence punishable under Sec.302, I. P. C. and awarded the sentence of life imprisonment. 2. The other three co-accused mohammad Hussain, Ahmad Ali alias ali Mohammad and Samsa Khatoon -brother, brother-in-law and sister of this accused-appellant were acquitted by the trial Court. These three co-accused were charged for abetting the murder under Sec.302 read with Section 109, I. P. C. The Trial judge found that the talk of the co-accused was in low tune and the same could not be heard by the prosecution witness and thus the charge of abatement of the commission of murder was not proved beyond doubt against the three co-accused. 3. According to the prosecution case, the deceased Sakina Khatoon, daughter of Md. Abbas was married with this accused-appellant Akbar Ali two years back and in that marriage father of the girl gifted ornaments and valuables worth Rupees five thousand which the daughter Sakina Khatoon brought while she came to live with her husband Akbar Ali; that this accused appellant Akbar Ali sold the ornaments of his wife Sakina and this resulted in dirences between Sakina and her husband Akbar Ali and her husband Akbar ali chestised his wife Sakina at times; and coming to know this chestisement of his young daughter Sakina, the father md. Abbas moved a petition - Exhibit-8 in the Court of the Magistrate under section 97 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for recovery of his daughter sakina from the house of her husband akbar Ali; and the Magistrate being satisfied issued a search-warrant - Exhibit-11 on 3rd November, 1982; Smt. Sakina was produced before the magistrate and she expressed her desire to go with her father to live at her fathers house, and on 22nd November, 1982 her father Abbas Ali gave a sureity bond- Exhibit-9 to the Magistrate and took his young daughter Sakina to live at her fathers house. 4. 4. After a month or about the husband Akbar Ali came at the house of his father-in-law and begged to be pardoned for his bad conduct, and his in laws permitted him to come to his house and to live with their daughter sakina; Akbar Ali was going to his tailoring shop and was coming back to live with his wife at his father-in-laws house; that on 31st March, 1983 mohammad Hussain, Ahmad Ali and smt. Samsa Khatoon (brother-in-law brother and sister of Akbar Ali) came to the house of Md. Abbas and they requested him to allow Akbar Ali and his wife Sakina to live separately and independently in another house as they were being humiliated by relations, friends and acquaintance for the stay of Akbar ali and his fathers in laws house. 5. Accordingly the arrangements were made for separate living of Sakina and her husband Akbar Ali and a hutroom was taken on a monthly rent of rupees twenty by Akbar Ali which belong to one Smt. Motaki alias maimun Khatoon, wife of Muslim mian, P. W.1, and this room on rent was situate half kilometres away from the house of Md. Abbas; next day on 2nd april, 1983 Sakina Khatoon and her husband Akbar Ali brought utensils and wooden takhat and occupied this rented room, for their living; that in evening the co-accused Md. Hussain, Ahmad Ali and Smt. Samsa Khatoon arrived there and Sakina gave a cup of tea to them, and they had a talk with her husband akbar Ali and thereafter the three left the house; in the afternoon Bibi majiban P. W.7, mother of Sakina arranged the purchase of rice, tea etc. for her daughter Sakina and left them at the house of her daughter, Sakina cooked the dinner of boiled rice with little Dal and vegetables and Sakina and her husband Akbar Ali took this cooked food to the house of Md. for her daughter Sakina and left them at the house of her daughter, Sakina cooked the dinner of boiled rice with little Dal and vegetables and Sakina and her husband Akbar Ali took this cooked food to the house of Md. Abbas where they took the dinner with Bibi Majidai; Smt. Sakina and her husband Akbar Ali came back to the rented house at about 9 p. m. in the night; Smt. Maimum Khatoonland lady P. W.1, and Smt. Noor Jahan p. W.3 and Smt. Najibul Khatoon P. W 5 - both were neighbours saw that Smt. Sakina Khatoon and her husband Akbar ali went inside their room at about 12 in the night of 2nd April, 1983 and they slept; Smt. Najibul Khatoon, P. W.5 who is distantly related to Smt. Sakina noticed that Akbar and Sakina bolted the room from inside while they went inside the room to sleep, and when sakina did not come out from the room at 7 AM. in the morning she went inside the room and she found that Sakina was lying dead on her Chowki with a big black mark around her neck and the dhibri. was giving light in the room and akbar was absent and she informed the landlady Smt. Motaki about this murder of Sakina. Noorjahan P. W.2 saw that akbar and Smt. Sakina had gone inside the room to sleep and she went to her room later on to sleep, and in the morning when she heard that Sakina was murdered she went inside her room and she found Sakina lying dead with black mark on her neck and Akbar was absent. They informed the land-lady and the land-lady Maimun Khatoon P. W.1 came to the room of Sakina and inside the room of Akbar she found that sakina was murdered with big black mark around her neck and Akbar was absent. This witness Maimun Khatoon p. W.1 stated that last night Sakina and akbar went inside the room in her presence and they slept there in their room, and in the morning her neighbour Najibul Khatoon P. W.5 told her that Sakina has been murdered. This witness Maimun Khatoon p. W.1 stated that last night Sakina and akbar went inside the room in her presence and they slept there in their room, and in the morning her neighbour Najibul Khatoon P. W.5 told her that Sakina has been murdered. All these three witnesses - the landlady maimun Khatoon, P. W.1, Noorjahan p. W.3 and Smt. Najibul Khatoon, P. W.5 have stated on oath that Akbar took the room of hutment thatch built on a rent of Rupees twenty per month from maimun Khatoon P. W.1 on 1st April and next day Akbar and his wife Sakina occupied this room and started living there. 6. Maimun. Khatoon, P. W.1 sent her husband Muslim Mian to the house of Md. Abbas (lather of Sakina) and muslim Mian gave the information to md. Abbas that his daughter Sakina was murdered in the night by her husband akbar AH. Accordingly Md. Abbas lodged the report at the Police Station-Exhibit-5 at 7.45 A. M. on 3rd April, 1983. Bishwanath Singh, Officer Incharge of the Police Station (P. W.10)recorded the first information report (Exhibit-5) and thereafter he took down the statement of Abbas Ali in the case diary. Bishwanath Singh inspected the site and he found three independent rooms in one line and they were occupied by Maimun Khatoon, P. W.1, noorjahan, P. W.2 and Najibul Khatoon, p. W.5 and in the north of the rooms there has been a room (thatch-roofed room) and in that northern room the dead-body of Sakina Khatoon was lying on the wooden Takhat. The Police Inspector found utensils, containers cooked Dal, tea Ketli etc. inside the room besides an oven. The Investigating officer also found the Dhibri for the light in the room. The Investigating Officer found the black-mark on the neck of the deceased and several abrasions as. well on the dead-body of Sakina khatoon. He prepared the inquest report - Exhibit-6. He prepared the challan lash (Exhibit-7) and sent this dead-body for post-mortem. After recording the statement of the witnesses the Investigating Officer gave the charge sheet. 7. Dr. Binod Kumar Mehta P. W.3 conducted the post-mortem on the dead-body of Sakina Khatoon at 2 P. M. on 3rd April, 1983. He found that sakina was about sixteen years of age and was of average built. Rigor mortis was present. 8. Dr. After recording the statement of the witnesses the Investigating Officer gave the charge sheet. 7. Dr. Binod Kumar Mehta P. W.3 conducted the post-mortem on the dead-body of Sakina Khatoon at 2 P. M. on 3rd April, 1983. He found that sakina was about sixteen years of age and was of average built. Rigor mortis was present. 8. Dr. Mehta found the following ante-mortem injuries: (i) A continuous ligature mark round the neck and on dissection extra-vasation , blood under the ligature mark. The muscle of the neck were found lacerated, and trachea was found to be fractured; (ii) Third to fifth ribs of right-side were fractured; and (iii) Abrasions of different shape and size were found on right forearms, neck and chest. Dr. Mehta found some fluid in the stomach. In the opinion of Dr. Mehta sakina Khatoon died due to asphyxia, as a result of strangulation of neck. In cross-examination Dr. Mehta stated there might be more than one assailant, and that it cannot be said definitely as to whether the deceased had taken meal or not before her death. 9 The prosecution has examined eleven witnesses. Smt. Maimun khatoon, P. W.1, Noorjahan P. W.2, Dr. Binod Kumar Mehta, P. W.3, Constable rama Ram, P. W 4, Najibul Khatoon p. W.5, Md. J. ubair, P. W 6, Bibi majidan - mother of the deceased P. W.7, Md. Abbas father of the deceased P. W 8, Raj Kishore Mehta P. W 9, Bishwanath Singh Investigating Officer, P. W.10 and Awadhesh Jha P. W.11. 10. Awadhesh Jha P. W.11 is a formal witness. He stated that he is Clerk of Sri Asharfi Rai, Advocate and on 3rd november, 1982 Md. Abbas got prepared the petition (Exhibit-8)through his Advocate Sri Asharfi Rai and it was moved before the Magistrate, and later two other petitions were given before the Magistrate by Md. Abbas (Exhibits-8/1 and 8/2) and finally the magistrate ordered that the daughter sakina Khatoon was allowed to go to live with her father Md. Abbas and her father Md. Abbas gave the surety bond (Exhibit-9) in the Court of the magistrate for keeping his daughter at his house. Raj Kishore Mehta, P. W.9 is a formal witness. He is a witness to the inquest report. Abbas and her father Md. Abbas gave the surety bond (Exhibit-9) in the Court of the magistrate for keeping his daughter at his house. Raj Kishore Mehta, P. W.9 is a formal witness. He is a witness to the inquest report. He has stated on oath that he found black mark around the neck of the deceased Sakina Khatoon and the Police Inspector prepared the inquest report in his presence. P. W.6 md. Jubair is a formal witness. He has stated that the Police Officer prepared the inquest report relating the dead body of Sakina in his presence. This witness md. Jubair P. W.6 stated in his cross-examination that Md. Sakina was living in that Kothari (where her dead body was found) as tenant from before this occurrence in the night. Constable rama Ram P. W.4 is a formal witness. He brought the dead-body of Sakina khatoon to Srikrishna Medical College for post-mortem along with challan lash as directed by the Police Inspector Bishwanath Singh. 11. Smt. Majidan mother of the deceased P. W 7 and Md. Abbas-father of the deceased P. W.8 have stated on oath that they married their daughter sakina with this accused-appellant akbar Ali two years back and they gave ornaments and valuables worth Rupees five thousand to their daughter Sakina at the time of marriage and Sakina went to live at the house of her husband akbar Ali and Akbar Ali sold the ornaments of his wife Sakina and Akbar Ali started harassing and chestising her and having come to know about this torture to Sakina, Md. Abbas moved the petition in the Court of the Magistrate and search-warrant was issued and as desired by Sakina her father Md. Abbas brought her daughter Sakina to his house after giving a surety bond to the magistrate; and after a month this accused Akbar Ali came and apologised for his conduct before the parents of sakina and they allowed Akbar to stay in their house in the company of their daughter Sakina Khatoon and Akbar was going to his in the day time; that on 31st March, 1983 at 11 AM. brother, brother-in-law and sister Mohammad hussain, Ahmad Ali alias Ali Mohammad and Samsa Khatoon came to their house and told him that the stay of akbar Ali at the house of his father-in-law was shameful and the society was condemning them and the parents of sakina allowed Akbar Ali to live independently along with his wife Sakina and next day on 1st April, 1983 arrangement was made and Akbar Ali took room of Smt. Motaki alias Maimun khatoon P. W.1 on a monthly rent of rupees twenty, and Akbar Ali and sakina went to live in their house situate half kilometre away and they collected the articles for cooking and living there. Bibi Majidan P. W.7 stated that she arranged the purchase of rice, tea, potato, pulses from the market for her daughter Sakina and she brought it at the house of daughter and thereafter she came, and Sakina and her husband brought cooked food at her house at 8 p. M. and they ate together and Sakina and Akbar Ali returned to their house at 9 P. M. to sleep, and that next morning muslim Mian, husband of Smt. Motaki brought the message to their house that sakina was murdered in the night, and akbar was absconding; and that Abbas ali came to the Police Station and lodged the report. Smt. Motaki @ maimun Khatoon, P. W.1, Noorjahan p. W.2 and Smt. Najibul Khatoon P. W.5 who were next door neighbours living in their rooms at a distance of a couple of steps have stated on oath that Akbar Ali and his wife Sakina were there together in the night of 2nd/3rd April, 1983 and both Akbar Ali and Sakina went inside the room to sleep and they bolted the room from inside and when they went inside the room it was about 12 in the night; and next morning at about 7 AM. when Sakina did not come outside najibul Khatoon P. W.5 and thereafter noorjahan P. W 2 went inside the room and they found that Sakina was lying on the wooden Takhat and she was murdered in the night. 12. when Sakina did not come outside najibul Khatoon P. W.5 and thereafter noorjahan P. W 2 went inside the room and they found that Sakina was lying on the wooden Takhat and she was murdered in the night. 12. The defence of this accused-ap-pellant before the Trial Court was that he had no connection at any point with his wife Sakina Khatoon when she went away to live with her parents and he was not there in the night of 2nd/3rd April, 1983 in that alleged rented room. 13. The accused-appellant has examined Muniwar Pathak Police, Sub-Inspector D. W.1, in defence. This witness Muniwar Pathak stated that he went to execute the search-warrant to recover Sakina Khatoon from the house of her husband Akbar Ali and he recovered her and she was produced before the Magistrate. This witness stated further that at the time of recovery he made inquiries from Sakina khatoon and she told that she was not inclined to live in the village with her husband Akbar Ali and she also told that her father did not give any ornaments and valuables, etc. at the time of her marriage. This witness admitted that there was no order of the Magistrate to make inquiries from Sakina Khatoon or to take down her statement; and that he made inquiries from her on his own accord. This witness admitted in cross-examination specifically that he prepared this report at his choice. 14. Accordingly this alleged statement taken down by Muniwar Pathak d. W.1, has no evidentiary value. The report prepared by his exhibit-A was unwarranted, and was also not prescribed under any provisions of the law. 15. Learned Advocate for the appellant raised the contentions that there was no motive for Akbar Ali to commit the murder of Sakina; that the medical evidence shows several injuries were there on the body of Sakina and no hue and cries was heard by any of the prosecution witness and her murder inside the room seems doubtful; that the medical evidence does not support the prosecution case and that the prosecution evidence does not establish fully that this accused appellant Akbar Ali was there in the room, when Sakina was murdered. 16. The prosecution evidence has confirmed the motive that at the time of marriage Md. 16. The prosecution evidence has confirmed the motive that at the time of marriage Md. Abbas gave ornaments and valuables as gift to his daughter which were worth Rupees five thousand or about; and that Akbar Ali said the ornaments of Sakina and thus the differences between Sakina and her husband Akbar Ali erupted. As Akbar Ali started torturing his wife Sakina, Md. Abbas was compelled to apply before the Magistrate and to bring his daughter sakina to her parents house. This could be the motive for Akbar Ali to commit the murder of Sakina Khatoon in the night of 2nd/3rd April, 1983 when sakina happened to raise the question again in that fateful night that her husband Akbar Ali should bring back her ornaments and valuables. Thus finding sakina not too submissive in that night akbar Ali would have committed murder of his wife Sakina. Another suggestion from the side of the prosecution as per prosecution case is that the relation co-accused Md. Hussain, Ahmad Ali and Smt. Samsa Khatoon also instigated akbar Ali that he should murder and get rid of his wife Sakina. Thus there might be the motive for Akbar Ali to commit the murder of his wife Sakina. 17. The prosecution evidence on record positively in there would be that sakina and her husband Akbar Ali went inside the room and bolted it from inside to go in bed at 12 in the night, and the neighbours elderly ladies - Smt. Maimun Khatoon, P. W.1, Noorjahan p. W.2 and Najibul Khatoon P. W.5 went inside their rooms thereafter in the night. These prosecution witnesses might be in deep sleep. The post-mortem report on record Exhibit-1 shows that Sakina was sixteen years or about in "age and she was of average built. The trial judge found that this accused-appellant was twenty-two years of age or about. There was. every probability for this accused-appellant Akbar Ali to cause abrasions on -the body of his wife sakina Khatoon while fondling her, and when a demand was raised by his wife sakina that he should arrange bringing back her ornaments and clothes. This accused-appellant Akbar Ali sat on her chest and gaged her neck and pressed her neck for long, and killed her; and thereafter he unbolted the room and left the room with his baggage. This accused-appellant Akbar Ali sat on her chest and gaged her neck and pressed her neck for long, and killed her; and thereafter he unbolted the room and left the room with his baggage. It was not a case of wild attack on Sakina as she would have raised loud cry enough to attract the sleeping inmates of the neighbouring rooms. 18. Learned Advocate for the appellant pointed out that the deposition of Dr. Binod Kumar Mehta shows that there might be more than one person in making these assaults on the neck of sakina. It is not definite opinion of the doctor. Further there is every probability for this accused-appellant Akbar ali to make these assaults, and the help of no other person was needed in making these assaults. Further learned advocate for the appellant pointed out that Dr. Mehta stated in cross-examination that he was not definite whether the deceased had taken the meal or not before her death and this negatived the prosecution case that she went to her parents house and took her meal. The prosecution evidence shows that she took her dinner at the house of her mother where she took rice. Dr. Mehta stated in his post-mortem report that some fluid was there in the stomach. Without four hours or about the rice food would have turned into the wholly digested food like liquid. Accordingly, it cannot be inferred either the prosecution case is not correct or sakina was not murdered in the night of 2nd/3rd April, 1983. 19. The prosecution evidence, statements of Smt. Maimum Khatoon p. W.1, Smt. Noorjahan P. W.2 and Smt. Najibul Khatoon P. W.5 established beyond doubt that Akbar Ali and his wife Sakina Khatoon were living together in this rented house and were cooking their meals and were sleeping in that house and in the night of 2nd/3rd April, 1983 both Sakina and her husband this accused-appellant akbar Ali went together inside the room in the bed at about 12 in the night and they bolted the room from inside and next morning at 7 a. m. when sakina did not come out, the prosecution witnesses went inside the room and they found that Sakina was lying dead on the wooden Takhat and she was found murdered with a big black mark on her neck; and that this accused-appellant Akbar Ali was absconding. The Investigating Officer bishwanath Singh, P. W.10, has stated on oath that he made all efforts to find akbar Ali and neither he was found at his parents house nor at the shop and thus he reported that the accused akbar Ali was absconding. 20. The above said facts established beyond doubt that this accused-appellant Akbar Ali committed the murder of sakina Khatoon in the night of 2nd/3rd april, 1983 in that rented room owned by Smt. Maimun Khatoon P. W.1. 21. Learned Advocate for the appellant suggested that some other persons might have killed Sakina, and this accused-appellant Akbar Ali had no strong motive to kill her. The prosecution evidence establishes fully that this accused-appellant Akbar Ali was there with Sakina Khatoon in that rented room in the night of 2nd/3rd April, 1983 and both this accused husband and Sakina Khatoon his wife bolted the room and they went in the bed at 12 in the night. This accused did not tell the presiding Judge in his statement under section 313, Cr. P. C, if any intruder entered in the house in the night or sakina Khatoon welcomed some one who later on adopted aggressive posture and killed her; and this accused appellant did not tell the Trial Court when he left this house and why he did not come forward to lodge the report at the Police Station. In absence of this omission on the part of the accused-appellant Akbar Ali, it is not acceptable in any way to our mind that some-one-else entered in the house in the night and murdered Sakina. 22. I find the prosecution evidence established beyond doubt that this accused-appellant Akbar Ali is guilty for the commission of murder of his wife smt. Sakina Khatoon. 23. Accordingly, this accused-appellant Akbar Ali has been held rightly guilty for the commission of offence of murder punishable under Sec.302 i. P. C. by the Trial Judge. The award of the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for life is warranted. 24. Accordingly the appeal is dismissed. 25. The bail bond of this accused appellant is cancelled. The accused-appellant Akbar Ali is undergoing the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for life. Accordingly this accused- appellant akbar Ali shall be taken into custody and lodged in jail to undergo the sentence. 26. 24. Accordingly the appeal is dismissed. 25. The bail bond of this accused appellant is cancelled. The accused-appellant Akbar Ali is undergoing the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for life. Accordingly this accused- appellant akbar Ali shall be taken into custody and lodged in jail to undergo the sentence. 26. A copy of the judgment be sent to the That Court and the Trial court shall be issuing custody warrant to secure the custody of this accused appellant Akbar All and shall lodge him in jail to undergo the sentence awarded by the Trial Judge. Appeal Dismissed.