JUDGMENT By Court.—This appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 30.08.2003 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, F.T.C. No. I, Jamshedpur, East Singhbhum in Sessions Trial No. 383 of 2000 convicting the appellant under Sections 302 of I.P.C. and sentencing him to undergo R.I. for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-and in default thereof, to undergo further R.I. for three months. He has also been convicted under Section 201 of I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years and to pay fine of Rs. 3,000/-and in default thereof, to undergo R.I. for one month. However, both the sentences were to run concurrently. 2. The prosecution case in short is that P.W. 10 – the police officer recorded his statement on 22.09.2000 at 22:30 hours at the place of occurrence that he received an information at about 8:30 P.M. about the death of a lady. After recording such Sanha, he alongwith other police officers, P.W. 7, 8 & 9 went to the place of occurrence, where people had assembled. He found that the Shila Singh said to be wife of the appellant was lying dead. He along with others and the lady owner of the house – P.W. 1 inspected the place of occurrence. The dead body was lying at the stairs of the basement. The appellant told that Shila used to work as a maid servant and he along with her lived in the servant quarter in the first floor. The appellant further said that after returning from his duty, he took meal and took rest with Shila. At about 5:00 P.M., she went for work in the house of the owner lady and he went to bring children. When he returned at about 7:00 P.M., he found that the door of the staircase was closed. He pushed the bell on several occasion, but no body replied. Then P.W. 1 opened the door. He went to his room in the upper floor, but did not find his wife. While searching her, he went to the basement, and found that she was hanging from the fan. He shouted on which P.W. 1 came and called the security guards. The appellant further said that in the meantime, he brought down the dead body and told the people that she has committed suicide. The inquest report was prepared. While searching her, he went to the basement, and found that she was hanging from the fan. He shouted on which P.W. 1 came and called the security guards. The appellant further said that in the meantime, he brought down the dead body and told the people that she has committed suicide. The inquest report was prepared. P.W. 10, the informant narrated in detail how it could not be a case of suicide, by taking measurement of the height of the basement, the height of the deceased, the Dupatta etc. He also found that the Dupatta around the fan came down on a slight pull. P.W. 10 clearly alleged that it was not a case of suicide. P.W. 1 denied that the appellant rang the bell at about 7:00 P.M. and she did not open the door as alleged. Thus he found that the appellant was telling lie. P.W. 1 further told that in the previous month at about 10:00 P.M. in the night, the appellant assaulted the deceased mercilessly when P.W. 1 and her husband intervened. Deceased used to tell that she is not happy with the appellant. The deceased used to work in the house of P.W. 2 earlier where also, the appellant used to assault her. Therefore, P.W. 10 alleged that the appellant had killed the deceased and hanged her to project it as a case of suicide. 3. Mr. R. K. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the appellant assailed the impugned judgment on various grounds. He submitted that the evidences show that it was a case of suicide. There was no motive for the appellant to commit the crime. It is a case of circumstantial evidence. The appellant be given benefit of doubt. 4. On the other hand, counsel for the State supported the impugned judgment. 5. The prosecution examined 10 witnesses. P.W. 1 – Deepika Dhir is the lady in whose house the deceased used to work as a maid servant. P.W. 2 – Alok Burman is the previous employer of the deceased. P.W. 3 and 4 are hostile witnesses. P.W. 5 is the doctor who conducted the post mortem on the deceased. P.W. 6 is the doctor who assisted him in the post mortem. P.W. 7 & 8 are the police officers who accompanied the other police officers i.e., P.W. 9, the I.O. and P.W. 10, the informant. 6. P.W. 3 and 4 are hostile witnesses. P.W. 5 is the doctor who conducted the post mortem on the deceased. P.W. 6 is the doctor who assisted him in the post mortem. P.W. 7 & 8 are the police officers who accompanied the other police officers i.e., P.W. 9, the I.O. and P.W. 10, the informant. 6. P.W. 1 has supported the prosecution case. She inter-alia said that the appellant said that the deceased has committed suicide on which she called the security guard and went to the place of occurrence and found Shila lying dead. In preceding month, at the time of dinner Shila came running when the appellant was beating her mercilessly. She also said that on the first floor one room was given to Shila to live with the appellant. There was basement in the house, which was used as store. P.W. 2, the earlier employer of the deceased said that the appellant was short tempered. P.W. 2, the earlier employer of the deceased inter-alia said that before removing Shila from employment, he learnt that the appellant had suspicion on the character of Shila. He denied to have illicit relation with Shila. When she was working with him, she gave birth a boy child. The relationship between the appellant and his wife (deceased) was good. P.W. 3 and 4 were declared hostile. P.W. 5 and 6, the doctors have supported the prosecution case. The doctors found one abrasion on the leg and one scratch on left side of axillae posterior part of the deceased. They also found ligature mark directed upward and laterally. Mark over left side neck was prominent, right side mark on neck was faint, but distinguishable. On dissection of the neck, doctor found nail head contusion between junction of thyroid and trachea in front. Left side upper part of neck muscle was found contused. Paetache was found present over mucosal surface of larynx and trachea. Right temporal region of skull was found contused. Right side brain was found highly congested. In the opinion of the doctor, the cause of death was asphyxia as a combined pressure by ligature and thumb pressure. Contusion over front of neck was caused by pressure of thumb. Abrasion, scratch and contusion over skull could be caused by hard and blunt object. Right side brain was found highly congested. In the opinion of the doctor, the cause of death was asphyxia as a combined pressure by ligature and thumb pressure. Contusion over front of neck was caused by pressure of thumb. Abrasion, scratch and contusion over skull could be caused by hard and blunt object. P.W. 7, 8, 9 and 10 are the police officers who visited he place of occurrence after receiving information. These witnesses along with P.W. 10 (informant) have fully supported the prosecution case. P.W. 9, the I.O. has also supported the prosecution case fully. He inter-alia said that the appellant confessed his guilt. On this, I.O. went to his room in which he and deceased used to live. He found the bed-sheet in scattered condition. Describing the place of occurrence, this witness has clearly and specifically said that it could not be a case of suicide. He has given the measurement of the height of the basement, the height of the ceiling fan from the floor, the length of the Dupatta which was wrapped around the fan, the height of the knot in Dupatta hanging from the ceiling, and the height of the deceased. The knot of the Dupatta was found loose and it was only at the height of 3 and ½ feet from the floor, whereas, the length of the deceased from sole to neck was 4'9". The other portion of the Dupatta which was wrapped around the fan came down on easy pull. Thus it was clearly demonstrated that the deceased did not commit suicide. When the appellant was again interrogated, he confessed his guilt. 7. It is true that there is no eye-witness to the actual incident, but the circumstances clearly indicate the guilt of the appellant. From the evidence of P.Ws. 1 and 2, it appears that relationship between the appellant and the deceased were not good. The confession of the appellant finds support from the other materials on record that he killed the deceased due to quarrel, and then took her dead body to the basement and kept it on the stair and hanged her Dupatta from the fan to show that it was a case of suicide. There is no reason to disbelieve the prosecution case. There is noting to indicate false implication. 8. There is no reason to disbelieve the prosecution case. There is noting to indicate false implication. 8. After carefully going through the records and hearing the parties at length in our opinion, the prosecution has proved its case against the appellant beyond all the reasonable doubts. In the circumstances, the appeal is dismissed.