Strangulation death in shared matrimonial home warrants conviction under Section 302 IPC on last-seen theory.

The appellant (husband) was convicted under Sections 302 and 498A of the IPC for the death of his wife.

On June 6, 2013, the appellant informed his father-in-law (PW 1) that the victim had committed suicide by hanging.

PW 1 alleged that the appellant tortured the victim over dowry demands and his extra-marital affairs.

The post-mortem report indicated death by violent asphyxia due to strangulation rather than hanging.

The appellant was at home with the victim and their minor children on the night of the incident, and a quarrel was reported.

The Trial Court sentenced the appellant to life imprisonment for murder.

The appellant challenged the conviction, citing lack of direct evidence and inconsistencies in witness testimonies.

1. Whether the non-examination of the complainant during the investigation and the scribe during trial is fatal to the prosecution's case.

2. Whether the medical evidence establishes the death as homicidal strangulation rather than suicidal hanging.

3. Whether the circumstantial evidence, including the "last seen" theory, is sufficient to sustain a conviction under Section 302.

The court applied Section 302 (Murder) and Section 498A (Cruelty) of the IPC.

It relied on Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act regarding the "last seen" doctrine, which places the burden of proof on the accused to explain facts within their special knowledge.

It cited Javed Abdul Rajjaq Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra regarding the medical distinctions between hanging and strangulation (e.g., saliva dribbling, ligature mark shape, and neck elongation).

It further applied Ravirala Laxmaiah v. State of A.P., establishing that the absence of a hyoid bone fracture does not exclude a finding of strangulation.

The Court found that while several neighbors turned hostile, their prior statements to police regarding the victim’s complaints of torture and the appellant's illicit affairs provided a corroborated motive.

The Court invoked the "last seen" theory, noting the appellant was admittedly at the PO with the victim on the fateful night and failed to provide a plausible explanation for her death.

Crucially, the Court adopted a detailed medical analysis: the absence of saliva dribbling, the horizontal and continuous nature of the ligature mark, the lack of neck elongation, and the presence of undigested food in the stomach collectively pointed to homicidal strangulation shortly after dinner.

The Court dismissed the appellant’s argument regarding the intact hyoid bone, noting that in victims under 40, such bones often remain unbroken during strangulation.

The High Court upheld the judgment of conviction dated December 5, 2016, and the order of sentence for life imprisonment under Section 302 and two years under Section 498A; the appeal (CRA 719 of 2016) was dismissed.