Crl.A. No. 409  of 2005 1

        IN THE SUPREME COURT OF  INDIA

          CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION   

            CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 409 OF 2005

   STATE OF U.P. ..  APPELLANT(S)

vs.

   SUMAN ..  RESPONDENT(S)

O R D E R

1. This is an appeal against acquittal.   

2. The  Sessions  Judge  had  convicted  the  respondent  

herein, the wife of the deceased, Manni, for an offence  

punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and  

had  awarded  a  sentence  of  life  imprisonment.   This  

judgment has been reversed by the High Court.  While doing  

so, the High Court has given several findings which to our  

mind call for no interference. The prosecution story is  

that (P.W. 1) Chunna and Smt. Kallo (P.W. 2), the parents  

of the deceased, had not seen the accused firing the shots

Crl.A. No. 409  of 2005 2

but  on  hearing  the  sound  of  firing  they  along  with  

Rameshwar, brother of PW 2, had entered the room belonging  

to the accused and the deceased and had found the injured  

lying there and on enquiry he had told Rameshwar that the  

accused had fired the shots injuring him.  We find it  

improbable, and it is so found by the High Court, that the  

respondent,  a young woman, had, at that stage, run away  

along with three young children despite the presence of  

two men in the room and after bolting the door from the  

outside.  The improbability of the story has been further  

highlighted by the High Court by observing  that as per  

the  prosecution,  the  injury  had  been  caused  to  the  

deceased from a short distance i.e. the firing was within  

the room but there were no signs of blackening, tattooing  

or charring around the wounds and as a shot gun had been  

used  allegedly   from  a  distance  of  8  to  10  feet  the  

dimension of injury no. 1 which was 1.00cm X 1.00cm which  

could not have been possible as there would be substantial  

dispersal of the pellets.  The High Court has also found  

that one metal bullet had been recovered from the dead  

body  which  could  not  be  a  pellet  from  a  shot  gun  

cartridge.  The High Court has also observed that the  

recovery of a gun from one Kamlesh about one month after  

the  incident  (which  was  the  licensed  weapon  of  the  

deceased) could not be connected with murder as the two

Crl.A. No. 409  of 2005 3

empty cartridges recovered from the murder site, did not  

match the murder weapon, more particularly, as the initial  

prosecution story was that the shot gun had been left  

behind in the room by the accused when she had run away.  

3. No interference is thus called for.

4. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.  

                   .......................J.          (HARJIT SINGH BEDI)

                   .......................J.

                                (R.M. LODHA) New Delhi,

    October 07, 2010.