NEW DELHI: The Tripura High Court has upheld the life sentence of a man convicted of strangling his wife, holding that the medical evidence, a history of cruelty and demands for money, and the circumstances surrounding her death formed a complete chain of evidence pointing to his guilt.In its October 6, 2026, judgment, a division bench dismissed the man’s appeal against his murder conviction. The trial court had sentenced him to life imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs 5,000.Why was the man accused of murdering his wife?According to the complaint lodged with police, the woman died at her matrimonial home on the night of March 14, 2010. Her brother said that when relatives reached the house the next day, they found her lying on the floor with bleeding injuries.The brother told police that she had married the accused about two years earlier. He alleged that soon after the marriage, her husband and mother-in-law began torturing her over demands for money.The woman’s family allegedly paid Rs 10,000 and Rs 5,000 to the husband on two occasions, but the harassment continued. Other relatives later testified that about Rs 30,000 in total was paid. The family also approached the Women’s Commission over the alleged abuse, and the accused persons assured them the torture would stop. It allegedly continued.Police filed a chargesheet against the husband and his mother under Sections 498A, 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, which deal with cruelty by a husband or his relatives, murder, and acts committed with a common intention.In February 2016, a sessions court convicted the husband of murder and sentenced him to life imprisonment. He challenged the conviction before the high court.His counsel argued that there was no eyewitness to the murder and that the prosecution relied largely on circumstantial and hearsay evidence. The defence also questioned whether the medical evidence could establish that he had committed the crime.The prosecution argued that the medical report established homicidal death and that witnesses had spoken about the husband’s cruelty and the events before and after the woman’s death.Why did the high court uphold the murder conviction?The bench of Justice T Amarnath Goud and Justice S Datta Purkayastha agreed that the case rested entirely on circumstantial evidence. It relied on testimony from relatives and neighbours about repeated quarrels, physical abuse and demands for money. Several witnesses also said the accused was addicted to liquor and tortured his wife while intoxicated.The court also noted evidence from the woman’s brother, a neighbour and her mother that a criminal case had earlier been filed against the husband for causing severe head injuries to her.One neighbour said the woman had taken shelter at her house after a quarrel on the night before her death and told her about the abuse. She later returned to her matrimonial home. Neighbours also said they heard the couple quarrelling that night.The post-mortem report recorded abrasions on both sides of the woman’s neck and an injury on her lower body. The doctor concluded that she died of manual strangulation. The bench said this medical opinion had not been discredited during cross-examination.“Thus, it is conclusively proved beyond reasonable doubt that the deceased died a homicidal death inside her matrimonial home,” the high court said.The bench noted that the woman was strangled inside the couple’s home, but her husband offered no explanation during his examination under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure about how she suffered the fatal injuries. It said these circumstances were especially within his knowledge under Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act.The court also noted that he was absent when relatives and neighbours arrived at the house, and that he did not appear at the spot until police arrived and people had gathered. A witness testified that police seized two pillows and two bottles of foreign liquor from the hut; the woman’s mother had said she believed her daughter was killed by strangulation or smothering with a pillow.Taking together the medical evidence, accounts of cruelty and demands for money, the earlier violence, the events before her death and the husband’s failure to explain what happened, the bench found the chain of circumstances complete.“Accordingly, this Court finds the evidence cogent, credible and conclusive beyond all reasonable doubt,” it concluded.The high court dismissed the appeal and upheld the man’s life sentence.