P (PLP)

ABDUL AZIZ C. J.‑

Mst. Karam Khatoon the appellant was tried with one Bakhoo who was acquitted and. she was convicted under section 302 Indian Penal Code and was sentenced, to trans portation for life. Her appeal is through jail. The short story of the prosecution was that Karim Bakhsh Deceased was the husband of Mst. Karam Khatoon accused and they lived together in Chak No. 184, Thana Dharanwala. They lived on good terms for some time but subsequently friction occur red among them with the result that she lived mostly in the house pf her maternal uncle Laloo P. W. 17 in Chak No. 17, Sub‑Tahsil Hasilpur. During her stay there she contracted illicit intimacy with Bakhoo accused who was then baildar, Hasilpur Rest House at a distance of one mile from the house of Laloo. About a week before the murder, Nizam‑ud‑Din P. W. 14 and his brother‑in‑law Laloo P. W. 1: and his two sisters went to the village of the deceased to pay some condolence visit there and advised the. deceased to bring his wife back to his house As there were rumour of her intrigue with Bakhoo accused. ; Nizam-ud‑Din and the ladies returned home earlier while aloo calve back with the deceased three or four days later. The deceased stayed in the house of Laboo with his wife for several days and after that they left for their Chak No.

184. During their way and with intent to spend the night they approached Imam‑ud‑Din P. W. 1 Zemindar, Cbah No.,156 Murad,, Imam‑ud‑Din was known to Karim Bakhsh and he invited him to accompany him to his Chak but the deceased refused the invitation arid requested Imam‑ud Din to accommodate them for the night somewhere around that place. Imam‑ud Din gave them a hot to spend the night and himself left the place. On the next morning he went to that hut, found the dead body of the deceased and informed Maula Bakhsh Nambardar. The parents and. her relatives of the deceased were sent for and Imam‑ud‑Din made the first informa tion report Exhibit PA. Nizam and Laloo were also suspected as privy to the crime. Bakhoo 'and Mst. Karam were alone taken into custody and tried. There is no eye‑witness in the case and the learned Session judge came to. the conclusion that the case against Bakhoo was not established. The conviction of lost. Karam Khatoon was recorded on circumstantial evidence alone. The circumstantial evidence was that the woman spent the night with the husband, that she was seen on the Next morning riding the camel on which. she had come from the house of Laloo with her husband and was arrested while concealing hereself in the bushes in the jungle. Her extra‑judicial confession before one Nadir Ram was also taken into consideration it may be staler that 1GIst. Karam had denied the charge and had pleaded that Bakhoo due bad com mitted the offence and she became unconscious at the time of the commission of the offence, that Bakhoo forcibly took, her away and kept her confined for some days in his house and the father of Bakhoo arranged her rescue and that she made no extra judicial confession before any person. We have considered these circumstances along with the learned Government Advocate and axe constrained to disagree with the conclusions of tie learned Sessions Judge, In our opinion those circumstances neither individually nor collectively could be treated sufficient fol. bye conviction of the woman under section 302 Indian Penal Code. The nature and the number of the injuries on the person of the deceased Karim Bakhsh leave us no doubt to conclude that the murder could ever be committed by Mst. Karam. According to the prosecution the murder was committed by Bakhoo and Mst. Karam. Bakhoo is absolved of the guilt and was acquitted: In other words, it was not proved that Bakhoo had taken part in the commission of the offence. Ac cording to the prosecution therefore only one person arid one alone was left to commit that diabolical murder and she was Mst. Karam. Now the medical examination reveals that 20 injuries were found on the person of the deceased ; 15 of which were on the head, face and chest of the deceased and were caused by some sharp‑edged weapon. The rest were contused wound, It means therefore that both the sharp and blunt weapons were used in the commission of this offence. It is preposterous to hold that so many injuries in the deceased could be caused by Mst. Karam and by two different weapons. This fact in itself goes strongly against the prosecution. It is a fact that Mst. Karam as with the husband. Could she not leave the place out of fear and conceal herself, even if her concealment is correct, to avoid suspicion if there could be any against her ? Neither of the two factors could prove the guilt of the woman. The extra‑ judicial confession can never form the basis of the conviction of a person unless it is properly proved. In other, words, unless the actual words of the person making tie confession are brought en the record, and such a confession finds reliable corroboration. Except suspicion there is no evidence against the appellant and it is always dangerous to record a conviction of an accused person on suspicicius circumstances alone. 'No body knows what part was played by the woman. while this much is clear that the murder could never be committed singly by her. No alternative is left for us but to accept this appeal and to set aside the conviction and sentence and acquit Mst. Karam, She should be released forthwith if not wanted in any other case‑ K. M.A Appeal accepted.