Judgment P.V. Hardas, J. 1. The appellant who stand convicted for an offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.1000/-, in default of which to undergo further RI for 6 months, by the Sessions Judge, Ratnagiri, by judgment dated 07.06.2007, in Sessions Case No. 54 of 2006, by this appeal questions the correctness of his conviction and sentence. 2. The facts in brief, as are necessary for the decision of this appeal, may briefly be stated thus: (i) PW-8 PSI Deepak Madhale who on 14.8.2006 was attached to Ratnagiri City Police Station, was entrusted with the papers for inquiry in respect of accidental death registered by the police station officer regarding the death of Manjusha, wife of the appellant. Accordingly, on the same day he went to the civil hospital at Ratnagiri. He drew inquest panchanama of the dead body of Manjusha, at Exhibit-16. He thereafter proceeded to the scene of the incident and drew the scene of incident panchanama at Exhibit-14 in the presence of panch-witnesses. The scene of the incident was at Block No.5 on 2nd floor in building in Zilla Parishad Colony at Ratnagiri. He thereafter collected the advance death certificate of Manjusha at Exhibit 31. According to him, since a prima facie case was made out, he lodged his report at Exhibit 36. On the basis of the said report, an offence punishable under Section 302 and 201 of IPC was registered. On the same day, the appellant was arrested and the entry was made in the station diary. Further investigation was then handed over to PW-9 Police Inspector Sanjay Stardekar. (ii) PW-9 PI Satardekar who was also attached to Ratnagiri City Police Station had received a message on 13.8.2006 from the Medical Officer at the city hospital at Ratnagiri about one Manjusha, wife of the appellant, who had died while being treated of epileptic attack. On the basis of the said information, PW-9 PI Satardekar had registered an accidental death and had handed over the inquiry to PW-8 PSI Madhale. Upon registration of the offence, PW-9 PI Satardekar conducted the investigation and recorded statements of the witnesses. During custodial interrogation, the appellant expressed his willingness to point the place where certain articles were concealed. Accordingly, a memorandum of the accused was recorded in the presence of panchas at Exhibit 38. Upon registration of the offence, PW-9 PI Satardekar conducted the investigation and recorded statements of the witnesses. During custodial interrogation, the appellant expressed his willingness to point the place where certain articles were concealed. Accordingly, a memorandum of the accused was recorded in the presence of panchas at Exhibit 38. After drawing of memorandum, the appellant led the police and panch to his house and produced pillow, handkerchief, black half pant and a pink coloured full shirt. The said articles were seized in the presence of panchas under seizure memo at Exhibit 23. On 17.8.2006, statements of the witnesses were recorded and the statements of the witnesses under Section 164 of Code of Criminal Procedure were also recorded on 26.8.2006. On 30.8.2006, viscera of the deceased was collected and was then forwarded to the chemical analyzer under a requisition at Exhibit 39. Further to the completion of the investigation, a chargesheet against the appellants was submitted. (iii) Postmortem on the dead body of the deceased Manjusha was performed by PW-7 Dr. Narendra Bhole. PW-7 Dr. Bhole noticed the following external injuries: “1. A transverse contusion on the anterior aspects of the neck below hyoid bone measuring 8cms x 1cms extending from the right angle of the mandible to the left angle of the mandible. 2. Multiple contusions on the left shoulder joint on the anterior aspect measuring 3cm x 1cm and 1cm x 1. 3. A contusion below the mid clavicular region on the left side measuring 2cm x 1cm. 4. An elliptical abrasion measuring 1cm x 0.2 cm on the right side at the angle of the mandible. 5. Multiple abrasion on the right side in the sub-mandibular region, electrical in shape of the size of 2 cms x 0.3 cms. 1Cm x 0.2 cms, 1cm x 0.3, 05 cms x 0.2cms, 0.5 cms x 0.1 cms, 0.5cms x 0.3 cms. 6. An elliptical abrasion above the mid claviculas region on the right side measuring 3 cms x 0.3 cms 7. On desection of the right and the left sub-mandibular regions, the sub-cutaneous tissue showed multiple tinny hameorrhages. 8. On internal examination of the head and the brain region and on cut section of the brain there appeared multiple tinny haemorrhages. 6. An elliptical abrasion above the mid claviculas region on the right side measuring 3 cms x 0.3 cms 7. On desection of the right and the left sub-mandibular regions, the sub-cutaneous tissue showed multiple tinny hameorrhages. 8. On internal examination of the head and the brain region and on cut section of the brain there appeared multiple tinny haemorrhages. On internal examination, he noticed: “the first and the second trachea range below the thyroid cartilage were fractured on cut section of the both lungs found congestion with oozing of froth. All other internal organs in the abdominal region were found congested. In the stomach presence of food material was found and therefore deceased had died within six hours of the last meal.” According to him, deceased had died due to asphyxia due to throttling. The postmortem report is at Exhibit 31. (iv) On committal of the case to the Court of Sessions, the Trial Court vide Exhibit 1 framed charge against the appellant for an offence punishable under Section 302, 201 and 498A of IPC. The accused denied his guilt and claimed to be tried. The prosecution, in support of its case, examined 9 witnesses. (v) The defence of the appellant primarily is of denial and it is suggested to the witness that the deceased who was chronic patient of epilepsy and had died on during attack of epilepsy. The Trial Court came to the conclusion that the prosecution had proved the case beyond reasonable doubt and accordingly convicted and sentenced the appellant. 3. In order to effectively deal with the submissions advanced before us by Shri Arfan Sait, learned Counsel for the appellants and the learned APP, it would be useful to refer to the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. 4. Prosecution has examined PW-5 Hazira Nishandar who deposes that she was residing with her three children in the Zilla Parishad Colony at Ratnagiri and knew the appellant as he was a co-worker. According to PW-5 Hazira, her house is on the second floor in the same building. According to PW-5 Hazira , the appellant and the deceased Manjusha used to quarrel frequently. In respect of the incident, she states that at about 9.30 or 9.45 pm, the accused and deceased Manjusha were quarreling and at that time PW-5 Hazira was present at the house of neighbour PW-6 Dattaram Pawaskar watching the programme on the TV. According to PW-5 Hazira , the appellant and the deceased Manjusha used to quarrel frequently. In respect of the incident, she states that at about 9.30 or 9.45 pm, the accused and deceased Manjusha were quarreling and at that time PW-5 Hazira was present at the house of neighbour PW-6 Dattaram Pawaskar watching the programme on the TV. According to her, she heard the noise of the quarrel between the appellant and Manjusha and accordingly told Mrs.Pawaskar that they would go to the 2nd floor to the house of the appellant to see what was happening. Mrs. Pawaskar told PW-5 Hazira that the quarrel between the appellant and his wife was a routine affair and it would be pointless for her and PW-5 Hazira to go to the house of the appellant. After some time, they noticed the appellant descending the steps along with his son and when enquired, the appellant disclosed that he was going to call wireman since there was no electric supply to the house. The appellant had also informed them that his wife was present in the house and was asleep. On the next day, at about 6.30 in the morning the appellant gave call to PW-5 Hazira and the message was conveyed by the daughter of PW-5 Hazira that the appellant was calling her. Since PW-5 Hazira was in hurry to go to Guhagar, she did not go to the house of the appellant. The appellant again called the daughter of PW-5 Hazira asking daughter of PW-5 Hazira to send PW-5 Hazira to the house of appellant along with pain-balm. PW-5 Hazira accordingly went to the house of the appellant and the appellant had informed her that Manjusha had not passed urine and she was uncomfortable. PW-5 Hazira accordingly examined the pulse of Manjusha and noticed that Manjusha was already dead. PW-5 Hazira then confronted the appellant as to what he had done to Manjusha, upon which the appellant bowed his head and stated that he had not done anything like that. He also disclosed that Manjusha was alive a short time before. PW-6 Pawaskar followed PW-5 Hazira to the house of the appellant. Thereafter, PW-5 Hazira and PW-6 Pawaskar went to the house of one Sharad Borkar and informed him everything. He also disclosed that Manjusha was alive a short time before. PW-6 Pawaskar followed PW-5 Hazira to the house of the appellant. Thereafter, PW-5 Hazira and PW-6 Pawaskar went to the house of one Sharad Borkar and informed him everything. Accordingly, PW-6 Pawaskar informed the police, and thereafter police arrived at the scene of the incident and carried the dead body of Manjusha to the civil hospital. In cross-examination PW-5 Hazira has admitted as correct that on the previous night electricity supply to the house of the accused was off. She has also admitted that the appellant had informed them that he was going to call a wireman. She has also admitted as correct that the only reason why the appellant wanted PW-5 Hazira to go to his house in the morning was that the appellant wanted Hazira to check Manjusha and examine her. According to PW-5 Hazira the behaviour of the appellant at that time was such that he somehow or the other wanted to save the life of his wife. The appellant also appeared to be disturbed on seeing the condition of Manjusha. According to PW-5 Hazira , when she had gone to the house of the appellant on 13.8.2006 in the morning she had not noticed anything suspicious. 5. Prosecution has examined PW-6 Dattaram Pawaskar who deposes on similar line as that of PW-5 Hazira. He too in the cross-examination has admitted that the behaviour of the appellant was that he wanted to save the life of his wife. The appellant had readily accompanied him and PW-5 Hazira to the house of Sharad Borkar. 6. PW-7 Dr. Bhole in his cross-examination has admitted as correct that the internal and the external appearance around the neck or the throat varied from person to person depending upon the amount of pressure use for throttling. He has also admitted as correct that pillow and handkerchief are comparatively soft substances as compare to a rope and wire. He has also admitted as correct that if the mouth of a person is gagged by the use of pillow the cause of death would be due to suffocation. He has also admitted as correct that death due to suffocation cannot be called as a death due to throttling. He has also admitted as correct that if the mouth of a person is gagged by the use of pillow the cause of death would be due to suffocation. He has also admitted as correct that death due to suffocation cannot be called as a death due to throttling. He has also admitted as correct that if a person is throttled by use of either a pillow or a handkerchief then the pressure exerted by the assailant is comparatively less than that could be exerted while using the substances like rope, wire, etc. He has further admitted as correct that if throttling was done by use of soft substance like pillow or a handkerchief then the chances of the appearance of small internal haemorrages multiple in number is rare. He has also admitted as correct that if throttling was done by fingers then the thumb and the finger impression usually appear on either side of the wind pipe. He has also admitted as correct that if the victim who is being throttled attempted to struggle and then assailant is likely to suffer injuries like bruises or abrasions. He has further admitted as correct that in case of accidental strangulation, the epileptic patient are mostly the sufferers and they are helpless in extricating themselves from such tight encirclement of the neck. He has also admitted as correct that in case of accidental strangulation of an epileptic patient the external sign on and around the neck externally may be the same as found in the case of Manjusha. He stated that the internal observations and symptoms may not be the same as according to him in an accidental strangulation fracture of the hyoid bone may not occur. He has also stated that the fracture of tracheal rings also would not be there. He then corrected himself that it is not necessary that in all cases in accidental strangulation of an epileptic patient there are fracture to the hyoid bone or to the tracheal rings. He has further admitted as correct that in most cases of asphyxial death there is dribbling of saliva from the mouth. 7. Manjushawas immediately examined by the Medical Officer of the hospital who has stated that the death had occurred within six hours prior to 10.10. am. The Medical Officer has clearly opined that the deceased had died after six hours after consumption of last meal. 7. Manjushawas immediately examined by the Medical Officer of the hospital who has stated that the death had occurred within six hours prior to 10.10. am. The Medical Officer has clearly opined that the deceased had died after six hours after consumption of last meal. Admittedly, no injuries were found on the person of the appellant. 8. The learned Counsel appointed for the appellant has urged before us that the deceased Manjusha may have died on account of seizure in epileptic fit as the deceased Manjusha was chronic patient of epilepsy. It is true that the appellant has placed certain documents on record which would indicate that Manjusha was an epileptic patient. There is nothing on record which would even remotely indicate that at that point of time Manjusha had suffered an epileptic fit. PW-5 Hazira and PW- Pawaskar have been examined by the prosecution and the appellant had not suggested to them that the appellant had informed them that Manjusha had suffered an attack of epilepsy. There is not a shred of evidence to indicate that Manjusha had suffered an epileptic fit. Postmortem further indicates that the deceased Manjusha had sustained several injuries which included ligature mark around neck due to which there was fracture to the hyoid bone. Manjusha had sustained multiple contusions on the left shoulder joint and had also sustained elliptical abrasion on the right side of the mandible. She had also sustained multiple abrasions on the right side of sub-mandibular region. The aforesaid injuries do not go hand in hand with the defence of the appellant that Manjusha had suffered an epileptic fit. 9. The learned Counsel for the appellant as further urged before us that the conduct of the appellant was certainly not the conduct of an accused who has committed the crime. The appellant had not made attempt to flee from the scene of the incident and appellant had readily accompanied PW- Hazira and PW-6 Pawaskar to the house of one Borkar. The appellant had himself informed the police and had taken his wife Manjusha to the hospital. The conduct of the appellant is post-event conduct. As to why the appellant did not flee is a question easy to pose, but very difficult to answer for the prosecution. As to what went in the mind of the appellant is certainly impossible for the prosecution to decipher. The conduct of the appellant is post-event conduct. As to why the appellant did not flee is a question easy to pose, but very difficult to answer for the prosecution. As to what went in the mind of the appellant is certainly impossible for the prosecution to decipher. Since the appellant had a small child, he perhaps felt it inconvenient to leave the child at the mercy of the neighbour and flee from the scene of the incident. Be that as it may, the reason as to why the appellant did not flee from the scene of the incident is not an issue which would determine if the offence has been committed or not. 10. In the present case, the Medical Officer has given the description of the injuries and looking to the fracture of the hyoid bone and the other internal injuries sustained by Manjusha, he has opined that deceased Manjusha had died as a result of throttling. The Medical Officer was unable to state the ligature which may have been used. The prosecution had attempted to put forth a case before the Court that the appellant had throttled Manjusha by a pillow. Accordingly, in a memorandum under Section 27, the pillow, handkerchief, half pant and a shirt were discovered by the appellant. The evidence of panch-witness certainly indicates that the police were aware about the place where the aforesaid articles were kept. In any event, the said articles were shown to have been produced by the appellant from his own house two days after the drawing the scene of incident panchanama. The aforesaid articles had not been concealed in any manner. We therefore find that no reliance at all can be placed on the discovery alleged to have been made at the behest of the appellant. 11. The learned Counsel for the appellant has urged before us that the pillow which was seized was not sent to the chemical analyzer and the Medical Officer therefore is not in a position to precisely state the ligature which was used for throttling. The Medical officer has opined that deceased Manjusha had died as a result of throttling. The Medical Officer has not referred to the ligature which could have been used. However, in the cross-examination it has been elicited that the ligature may have been a rope or a wire. The Medical officer has opined that deceased Manjusha had died as a result of throttling. The Medical Officer has not referred to the ligature which could have been used. However, in the cross-examination it has been elicited that the ligature may have been a rope or a wire. The Medical officer has also admitted that if the pillow or handkerchief was used, the degree of pressure would be different. 12. However, failure of the prosecution to elicit the exact ligature which was used, would not detract from the prosecution case the fact that deceased Manjusha had died a homicidal death. Death of Manjusha was certainly not a normal or an accidental death. Suicide is obviously ruled out. The cross-examination of the Medical officer is centered around the questions which are posed in respect of accidental throttling of epileptic patients where inadvertently some object around the neck is entangled and fastened to such an extent that the epileptic patient may be throttled and may also die. Obviously no such ligature was at all found around the neck. If such ligature was found, we find it difficult to believe that the appellant would straighten everything and then make Manjusha sleep on the bed and inform PW-5 Hazira and PW-6 Pawaskar that Manjusha was sleeping. The possibility that deceased Manjusha died as a result of accidental strangulation also does not appear to us to be probable. The failure of the prosecution to refer the pillow to the Chemical Analyzer would obviously in no manner weaken the case of the prosecution against the appellant. 13. The learned Counsel for the appellant has referred to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Mohd. Zahid Vs. State of Tamil Nadu [1999 CRI L.J. 3699]. In the said case, the Supreme court found that no reliance could be placed on the evidence of the Medical Officer as the Medical Officer had disagreed with the statements found in the text-books without assigning any reason. The Medical Officer had also not produced any authorities in support of her opinion. The Supreme Court further found on the facts that the evidence of the doctor was self-contradictory regarding her opinion about the cause of death. The Supreme Court, at para-23 of the said judgment, has noted the contradiction in the opinion expressed by the Medical Officer. The Medical Officer had also not produced any authorities in support of her opinion. The Supreme Court further found on the facts that the evidence of the doctor was self-contradictory regarding her opinion about the cause of death. The Supreme Court, at para-23 of the said judgment, has noted the contradiction in the opinion expressed by the Medical Officer. The Medical Officer i.e. PW-8 at the time of postmortem examination had stated that there would not be any change in the brain in the case of cerebral anoxia and therefore could not state if the brain had become pale or not since the brain had become liquefied. She was also specific in her statement that there was no other sign by which she could say was cerebral anoxia. The Supreme Court found that brain of Jabeena had liquefied and there was no way by which PW-8 could have noticed the paleness in the brain. However, in the later part of her evidence, the Medical Officer deviated from her earlier opinion and stated that it is not correct to say that no opinion of cerebral anoxia could be given or arrived at in the case of liquification of the brain. The Supreme Court therefore found these two statements were diametrically opposed to each other and therefore the Supreme Court opined not to place reliance on the evidence of the Medical Officer. The ratio of the said judgment therefore in our opinion would not be applicable to the facts of the present case. 14. The learned Counsel for the appellant has then placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in SubramaniamVs. State of Tamil Nadu [2009 CRI L.J. 3002]. In this case also the Supreme Court found that the Medical Officer had not stated about the symptoms usually found in death by asphyxia and despite that the Medical Officer had opined that cause of the death was asphyxia. The Supreme Court therefore found that no reliance could be placed on the said Medical Officer. The Supreme Court also found that though the wife of the accused had died in the matrimonial home and no explanation about the cause of death is given by the accused, it could not be made the basis of conviction in the absence of evidence of any violence on the deceased. 15. The Supreme Court also found that though the wife of the accused had died in the matrimonial home and no explanation about the cause of death is given by the accused, it could not be made the basis of conviction in the absence of evidence of any violence on the deceased. 15. In the present case, the Medical Officer has noted the findings and especially about the fracture of the hyoid bone and the tracheal rings. The lungs were found to be pale and therefore the Medical Officer had opined that the deceased died due to asphyxia due to throttling. The sings of throttling are apparent as trachea and the tracheal rings had been fractured. Deceased had sustained other injuries which were unassociated with the throttling. These injuries could only indicate the violence or for subduing the struggle of the deceased. In that background therefore according to us the ratio of the said judgment would be inapplicable to the facts of the present case. 16. We therefore find from the evidence of the prosecution that the appellant was present in the house. In fact, the appellant does not claim that he was away from the house and that someone else in his absence had entered the house and had killed his wife. PW-5 Hazira and PW-6 Pawaskar have deposed about the presence of the appellant. Deceased had died a homicidal death and was found in the house of the appellant. Apart from the appellant, no one else could have killed the deceased. A quarrel between the deceased and the appellant was going on in the previous night. Thus the chain of the circumstances is so complete that it excludes every hypothesis of the innocence of the accused and points to the accused as perpetrator of the crime. In other words, apart from accused none else could have committed the crime. 17. The learned Counsel for the appellant has further urged before us that since because of the quarrel, appellant in a fit of rage may have struck the deceased and thus the offence would be one punishable under Section 304 of the IPC, i.e. culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Apart from the quarrel, there is nothing to indicate that there was any fight between the appellant and deceased. No injuries have been noticed on the person of the appellant. Apart from the quarrel, there is nothing to indicate that there was any fight between the appellant and deceased. No injuries have been noticed on the person of the appellant. Because of a mere quarrel, benefit of the Exception 4 cannot be extended to the accused. The other injuries sustained by the deceased clearly indicate that the appellant had assaulted the deceased with some weapon. No case therefore is made out for altering the conviction of the appellant to Section 304. 18. Thus giving our anxious consideration to the evidence on record, according to us the prosecution has proved the offence against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. The appeal filed by the appellant therefore being sans merits is accordingly dismissed confirming his conviction and sentence. 19. Since the appellant is in jail, a copy of this judgment be sent to the appellant. Fees payable to Shri Arfan Sait, learned Counsel appointed for the appellant quantified at Rs.5000/-.