Delhi District Court
State vs . Raj Kumar, on 11 May, 2017
1
IN THE COURT OF SHRI VIVEK KUMAR GULIA
ASJ03 & SPECIAL JUDGE (COMPANIES ACT)
DWARKA DISTRICT COURTS, DELHI.
In the matter of:
State Vs. Raj Kumar,
S/o Sh. Mangat Ram,
R/o Village Rawta,
Najafgarh, New Delhi.
Registration No. of the Case : 441073/2016.
SC No. : 146/2015.
FIR No. : 12/2013.
PS : J.P. Kalan.
Under Section : 498A/302 IPC.
Date of Institution : 27.04.2013.
Case Committed to the Court of Sessions
for : 08.05.2013.
Case Received by this Court by way of
Transfer on : 09.03.2015.
Case Reserved for Judgment on : 24.04.2017.
Judgment Announced on : 11.05.2017.
Page No. 1 of 24. State Vs. Raj Kumar; FIR No. 12/13 of PS J.P. Kalan.
2
JUDGMENT
FACTUAL BACKGROUND:
1. The following is a brief account of prosecution case and other relevant facts:
1.1 In this case, FIR was registered u/s 307 IPC on the statement (dying declaration) of Manisha Ex. PW3/B, whereby she mentioned that she was married with accused Raj Kumar about 11 years back and since beginning, he used to harass and beat hear. On 01.02.2013, the accused quarrelled with her and started beating her. On hearing the noise, her brotherinlaw Sajan Kumar came there and saved her. Thereafter, accused Raj Kumar went away, but came back in 10 minutes. Further, he sprinkled petrol brought by him in steel glass and also stated that he would finish her today. Thereafter, he set her on fire with the help of matchstick in order to kill her. 1.2 The complainant succumbed to burn injuries on 08.02.2013.
1.3 During investigation, medical documents of the deceased were collected, the accused was arrested, steel glass, matchsticks, burnt clothes, broken bangles and scooter bearing Page No. 2 of 24. State Vs. Raj Kumar; FIR No. 12/13 of PS J.P. Kalan.
3 registration no. HR136865, from which the petrol was allegedly taken out by the accused, were seized.
2. After culmination of investigation, the accused was chargesheeted and produced before the Court of Ld. Area MM. After complying with the provisions of Section 207 CrPC, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions u/s 209 CrPC.
TRIAL PROCEEDINGS:
3. In light of the above stated facts and proceedings, vide order dated 30.05.2013, Ld. ASJ framed charges under Sections 498A/302 IPC against the accused, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. For proving its case, prosecution has produced 15 witnesses.
4.1 Most important witnesses are PW3, Dr. Anil Yadav, Medical Officer, RTRM Hospital, J.P. Kalan, New Delhi, and PW9, SI Satish Kumar, in whose presence the dying declaration Ex. PW3/B was given by the deceased.
4.2 PW13, Sajan Kumar, brother of the accused, who had Page No. 3 of 24. State Vs. Raj Kumar; FIR No. 12/13 of PS J.P. Kalan.
4 allegedly intervened between the fight of the deceased and the accused before the incident, did not support the prosecution case. 4.3 PW1, Surinder, and PW2, Shri Om, who were uncle and brother of the deceased respectively, deposed that when they reached in the hospital on the date of incident, the deceased was unable to talk and was in critical condition. 4.4 Rest of the witnesses are related to investigation or medical examination of the deceased.
5. Statement of the accused was recorded u/s 313 CrPC. When the accused was briefed on all the incriminating evidence and documents, he denied the allegations and mentioned that he got the deceased admitted in the hospital in burnt condition, but dying declaration was not recorded in his presence and the same was fabricated at the behest of PW3 Dr. Anil Yadav and one police official. Further, he deposed that scooter seized in this case was parked in the adjacent plot, but was not in running condition. He further explained that his wife was suffering from mental disease and there had been suicidal tendency in her family. Further, it is stated that at the relevant time, he was repairing handpump in an adjacent plot with one Surinder and after hearing the cries of his wife for help, he rushed to his house Page No. 4 of 24. State Vs. Raj Kumar; FIR No. 12/13 of PS J.P. Kalan.
5 and saw that his wife was burning. Then he tried to rescue her and he also received burn injuries on the chest and hand. Thereafter, he and his brother Sajan Kumar took his wife to hospital, where the doctor and police demanded money and when he showed his inability, they threatened to implicate him in a false case. Further, he mentioned that his brother called at phone no. 100 to inform the police about demand of bribe and taking false statement by the doctor and the police.
6. The accused opted to lead evidence in his defence and produced 6 witnesses. Important ones are as under:
6.1 DW2, Surinder, mentioned that the accused was with him at the time of incident in the adjacent plot. 6.2 DW3, Sat Bhagwan, mentioned that on the date of incident, the deceased had come to him for taking kerosene oil required for burning hearth (chulah) and since he was not having kerosene oil, some petrol was given to him.
6.3 DW4, Ravinder, mentioned that on the date of incident, he went to hospital with Surinder. In the hospital, the doctor and the police official demanded money from the accused and his brother and when they threatened the accused to falsely implicate him, Sajan Kumar took his mobile phone and called Page No. 5 of 24. State Vs. Raj Kumar; FIR No. 12/13 of PS J.P. Kalan.
6 police at phone no. 100.
6.4 DW8, Dr. Ravikant Guglani, deposed that Manisha was brought to his clinic in the year 2011 with the complaints of suicidal thoughts, loss of sleep, headache etc. APPRECIATION OF EVIDENCE:
7. I have heard the State through Sh. Pramod Kumar, ld. Additional PP for State and the accused through ld. counsel Sh. J.P. Sehrawat. Record is also gone through.
8. It is summed up by the ld. Additional PP that dying declaration of Manisha Ex. PW3/B clearly accuses Raj Kumar of beating her and further setting her ablaze with intention to kill her and it is sufficient to convict the accused for murdering his wife and for subjecting cruelty to her prior to the incident. Further, it is pointed out that PW3 and PW9 have proved the fact that the said dying declaration was recorded in their presence when the deceased was in fit state of mind. It is also mentioned that steel glass, which was filled up of petrol sprinkled on the deceased; scooter bearing registration no. HR13 6865, from which the petrol was taken out by the accused and Page No. 6 of 24. State Vs. Raj Kumar; FIR No. 12/13 of PS J.P. Kalan.
7 matchsticks have been seized from the spot and these provide sufficient corroboration to the prosecution case qua culpability of the accused. On the other hand, ld. defence counsel vehemently argued that PW3 and PW9 had manipulated the dying declaration of the wife of the accused, when accused did not accede to their demand of bribe. Further, it was argued that dying declaration was neither properly certified by doctor (PW3) nor the signatures of the deceased were taken on it. It was also mentioned that the presence of thumb impression of the deceased on the dying declaration, though her hands were burnt in the incident, in itself throws doubt over the authenticity of the dying declaration. It was also argued that there is no investigation to show that the scooter seized in this case was having petrol on the date of incident and FSL report makes it clear that recovered steel glass had no traces of petrol. In view of above, acquittal of the accused has been prayed for.
9. In this case, there are following important points of determination:
(i) Whether the accused had set his wife namely Manisha on fire after pouring petrol on her with an Page No. 7 of 24. State Vs. Raj Kumar; FIR No. 12/13 of PS J.P. Kalan.
8 intention to kill her; and
(ii) Whether the accused had subjected the deceased to cruelty prior to the said incident.
10. Admittedly, there is no direct evidence on record to show that the accused had sprinkled petrol on the deceased before setting her on fire in order to murder her. The prosecution case is primarily based on dying declaration Ex. PW3/B, which was recorded by PW9 SI Satish Kumar in hospital. Thus, now the Court needs to examine as to whether the said dying declaration can be relied upon to convict the accused.
11. The legal position in respect of dying declaration has been settled by the Supreme Court of India through catena of decisions. The general principles governing the dying declaration were summed up by Supreme Court of India in the case titled "Paniben (Smt) Vs. State of Gujarat", (1992) 2 SCC 474, as under:
"18. Though a dying declaration is entitled to great weight, it is worthwhile to note that the accused has no power of cross examination. Such a power is essential for eliciting the truth as an obligation of oath could be. This is the reason the Court also insists that the dying declaration should be of such a nature as to inspire full confidence of the Court in its Page No. 8 of 24. State Vs. Raj Kumar; FIR No. 12/13 of PS J.P. Kalan.
9 correctness. The Court has to be on guard that the statement of deceased was not as a result of either tutoring, prompting or a product of imagination. The Court must be further satisfied that the deceased was in a fit state of mind after a clear opportunity to observe and identify the assailants. Once the Court is satisfied that the declaration was true and voluntary, undoubtedly, it can base its conviction without any further corroboration. It cannot be laid down as an absolute rule of law that the dying declaration cannot form the sole basis of conviction unless it is corroborated. The rule requiring corroboration is merely a rule of prudence. This Court has laid down in several judgments the principles governing dying declaration, which could be summed up as under:
(i) There is neither rule of law nor of prudence that dying declaration cannot be acted upon without corroboration. ["Mannu Raja Vs. State of M.P.", (1976) 3 SCC 104]
(ii) If the Court is satisfied that the dying declaration is true and voluntary it can base conviction on it, without corroboration. ["State of U.P. Vs. Ram Sagar Yadav", (1985) 1 SCC 552; "Ramawati Devi Vs. State of Bihar", (1983) a SCC 311]
(iii) This Court has to scrutinize the dying declaration carefully and must ensure that the declaration is not the result of tutoring, prompting or imagination. The deceased had opportunity to observe and identify the assailants and was in a fit state to make the declaration. ["K. Ramachandra Reddy Vs. Public Prosecutor", (1976) 3 SCC 618]
(iv) Where dying declaration is suspicious it should not be acted upon without corroborative evidence. ["Rasheed Beg Vs. State of M.P.", (1974) 4 SCC 264]
(v) Where the deceased was unconscious and could never make any dying declaration the evidence with regard to it is to be rejected. ["Kake Singh Vs. State of M.P.", AIR 1982 SC 1021] Page No. 9 of 24. State Vs. Raj Kumar; FIR No. 12/13 of PS J.P. Kalan.
10
(vi) A dying declaration which suffers from infirmity cannot form the basis of conviction. ["Ram Manorath Vs. State of U.P.", (1981) 2 SCC 654]
(vii) Merely because a dying declaration does not contain the details as to the occurrence, it is not to be rejected. ["State of Maharashtra Vs. Krishnamurti Laxmipati Naidu", AIR 1981 SC 617]
(viii) Equally, merely because it is a brief statement, it is not be discarded. On the contrary, the shortness of the statement itself guarantees truth. ["Surajdeo Oza Vs. State of Bihar", AIR 1979 SC 1505]
(ix) Normally the Court in order to satisfy whether deceased was in a fit mental condition to make the dying declaration look up to the medical opinion. But where the eye witness has said that the deceased was in a fit and conscious state to make this dying declaration, the medical opinion cannot prevail. ["Nanahau Ram Vs. State of M.P.", AIR 1988 SC 912]
(x) Where the prosecution version differs from the version as given in the dying declaration, the said declaration cannot be acted upon. ["State of U.P. Vs. Madan Mohan", (1989) 3 SCC 390]"
12. In view of aforesaid principles, if the dying declaration given in this case is considered, following important aspects come under scrutiny of this Court:
(i) Dying declaration has been recorded by the police official in the hospital;
(ii) Dying declaration does not bear the signatures of the deceased and only her thumb impression was taken;
(iii) The Magistrate was not called for recording the Page No. 10 of 24. State Vs. Raj Kumar; FIR No. 12/13 of PS J.P. Kalan.
11 dying declaration;
(iv) Dying declaration has not been recorded in questionanswer form;
(v) Time of recording of dying declaration has not been mentioned; and
(vi) No independent person was made a witness to the dying declaration though the patient was admittedly brought by her relatives to the hospital.
13. It is evident that dying declaration Ex. PW3/B of Manisha clearly accuses accused Raj Kumar of first pouring petrol on her and subsequently setting her on fire with the intention to kill her. However, ld. defence counsel has raised serious doubts on the authenticity of the dying declaration on the ground that the deceased never wanted to make the statement against her husband and her thumb impression was taken on blank paper without her willingness or consent by SI Satish Kumar (PW9) in collusion with Dr. Anil Yadav (PW3) only to falsely implicate the accused in this case. Further, the accused has also explained these facts in his statement u/s 313 CrPC and suggestions were also given to PW3 and PW9 in this regard. Further, DW4 was also produced to show that brother of the Page No. 11 of 24. State Vs. Raj Kumar; FIR No. 12/13 of PS J.P. Kalan.
12 accused namely Sajan Kumar called the police at phone no. 100 from the hospital as the accused was threatened for his false implication in this case by the police official when he denied to pay the bribe to him and the doctor. In this regard, Delhi Police Control Room form no. 1 Ex. PW3/DA was referred to substantiate the said plea of defence. This form shows that a call was made to the police control room at 1.01 pm, whereby it was informed that "bhabhi jal gayee thi or bayan dena nahi chahti hai or doctor or HC jabardasti bayan le rahe hain. Police bheje". Prosecution has not disputed said call. In such circumstances, it needs to be carefully examined whether dying declaration is a genuine or manipulated document.
14. First of all, it is observed that no prosecution witness has said that dying declaration Ex. PW3/B bears thumb impression of the deceased. Though PW3 and PW9 have deposed that statement of the deceased was recorded, but it was also required on their part to prove that her thumb impression was obtained on it. Further, the manner of recording the dying declaration raises doubts about its authenticity. It is found that the dying declaration has been recorded in the language, which Page No. 12 of 24. State Vs. Raj Kumar; FIR No. 12/13 of PS J.P. Kalan.
13 is normally used by the police officials for recording statements u/s 161 CrPC. The use of words "aaj to tumhe khatam karke hi dam lunga. Tune hamhara jeena haram kar rakha hai ... ... ... Mere ko jalane ki niyat se mere me aag laga di, jo mere pati ne jaanbujhkar mujhe marne ki niyat se mujh me aag lagai hai." make it clear that the statement is not true and exact account of the narration made by the deceased. Furthermore, though it is not an absolute requirement that the dying declaration should be recorded in question and answer form, but it is required that the exact statement made by the deceased should be available to the Court. As mentioned in the aforesaid case law, the Court needs to be convinced fully that the statement of the deceased was not result of tutoring, prompting or product of imagination. Unless the dying declaration is in question and answer form, it is very difficult to know to what extent the answers have been suggested by questions put. Moreover, PW9 had not mentioned that the statement was read over to or seen by the deceased. Thus, the dying declaration in the case in hand does not seem to be the reproduction of original facts, which might have been disclosed by the deceased.
Page No. 13 of 24. State Vs. Raj Kumar; FIR No. 12/13 of PS J.P. Kalan.
14
15. Furthermore, it is observed that as per Punjab Police Rule No. 25.21 applicable to Delhi, a dying declaration has to be recorded by a Magistrate and if no Magistrate is available, the dying declaration shall be recorded in the presence of gazetted police officer (ACP and above), otherwise in the presence of two or more reliable witnesses unconnected with the police department and with the parties concerned with the case. It has also been provided that if no such witnesses can be obtained without risk of the injured person dying before his statement can be recorded, it shall be recorded in the presence of two or more police officials. Admittedly, Dr. Anil Yadav (PW3) and other staff of hospital were available at the time of recording of dying declaration and thus, there was no justification for PW9 to record the same. Moreover, apart from PW9, one more police official was also present in the hospital and it was least required that he must have been made the witness to the dying declaration. On this aspect, ld. defence counsel has rightly pointed out that even the IO made no effort to call the Magistrate for recording dying declaration subsequently. It is noteworthy that even the IO has admitted in his cross examination that in case of burning, statement of injured should be recorded in the presence of a Magistrate and he did not make any effort in next seven days i.e. Page No. 14 of 24. State Vs. Raj Kumar; FIR No. 12/13 of PS J.P. Kalan.
15 till the deceased remained in the hospital for her treatment, to get her statement recorded through any Executive Magistrate. Thus, it is clear that the IO (PW9) had flouted the rules without any justification.
16. Further, though it is not proved, but it is claimed by the prosecution side that the dying declaration bears the right thumb impression of the deceased. However, the accused has mentioned in his statement u/s 313 CrPC that his wife was 10 th passed and never used to put thumb impression. On this aspect, PW3 deposed that palm and fingers of the deceased were not burnt, but since her entire hands were bandaged, she must have been in severe pain and thus, she was not asked to give her statement in her own handwriting. PW3 had initially mentioned that the thumb impression of the deceased were obtained on two documents i.e. MLC Ex. PW3/A and dying declaration, but he was recalled by the Court for clarification as it was observed that on the MLC Ex. PW3/A, the doctor had taken great toe impression instead of thumb impression of the deceased. On this aspect, PW3 replied that thumb of the deceased was burnt and was not in condition for taking thumb impression and that is Page No. 15 of 24. State Vs. Raj Kumar; FIR No. 12/13 of PS J.P. Kalan.
16 why on MLC Ex. PW3/A great toe impression of the deceased was obtained. Further, he mentioned that he is unable to say as to how right thumb impression of Manisha was obtained on the dying declaration Ex. PW3/B. Thus, MLC of the deceased makes it quite clear that she had burn injuries on almost her entire body and that is why impression of great toe was obtained when the deceased was brought to hospital. In such circumstances, the presence of right thumb impression of the deceased on the dying declaration becomes suspicious.
17. Though PW3 had certified that the deceased was in fit state of mind to give the statement, however, PW1 and PW2, uncle and brother of the deceased respectively, mentioned that when they visited the hospital about 6.00 pm, the condition of the deceased was very critical and she was not in a position to speak. Moreover, PW2 had also mentioned in his cross examination that the deceased had told him before her death to take care of her nephew and niece and nothing should go against the accused. All this give strength to the plea of defence that the deceased was not willing to give any statement and her dying declaration was manipulated.
Page No. 16 of 24. State Vs. Raj Kumar; FIR No. 12/13 of PS J.P. Kalan.
17
18. Further, it is noteworthy that the said dying declaration only bears signatures of the doctor without his endorsement that the statement was recorded in his presence. If the doctor was present at the time of recording of dying declaration of the deceased and he heard the statement of the deceased, he would have ordinarily endorsed to that effect. Moreover, in his cross examination, PW3 has mentioned that at the time of recording of dying declaration, there were three doctors, one of them was Dr. Rakesh and 23 staff nurses in the Casualty Department, but subsequently, he mentioned that besides himself and IO, no body was present at the time of recording of dying declaration. Thus, there arises a doubt whether the statement was recorded in presence of PW3.
19. Further, it is also evident that the dying declaration does not indicate the time when it was recorded. As per rukka Ex. PW9/E, though it appears that the statement must have been prepared prior to 1.00 pm, but the doctor has not given any satisfactory reply in this regard. Initially, the doctor mentioned that it was recorded about half an hour of admission of the deceased in the hospital, but subsequently, he mentioned that he is not sure when it was recorded. Ordinarily, a document as Page No. 17 of 24. State Vs. Raj Kumar; FIR No. 12/13 of PS J.P. Kalan.
18 valuable as a dying declaration is supposed to be foolproof and is to incorporate the particulars which it is supposed to contain. But, no justifying reason has been furnished for said omission.
20. In view of aforesaid loopholes and discrepancies, this Court is of the opinion that it would not be safe to rely on the dying declaration completely to give a finding in favour of the prosecution side. This opinion gains strength from the decision of Supreme Court of India given in case titled "State (Delhi Administration) Vs. Laxman Kumar & Others", (1985) 4 SCC 476, wherein the Court declined to attach importance to dying declaration with the similar discrepancies and infirmities. Thus, the rule of prudence requires that the corroborative evidence should be looked for to ascertain the guilt of the accused for the alleged offences.
21. The prosecution has produced brother of the accused namely Sajan Kumar (PW13) to prove that he had intervened in the fight/quarrel between the deceased and the accused some time before the incident. This fact has also surfaced in the said dying declaration. However, PW13 did not support the Page No. 18 of 24. State Vs. Raj Kumar; FIR No. 12/13 of PS J.P. Kalan.
19 prosecution case on any aspect. He is an interested witness and thus, reason for his turning hostile is quite obvious.
22. Further, it is the prosecution case that the accused had taken petrol out of scooter bearing registration no. HR136865 in a steel glass and both these things were seized vide memo Ex. PW9/J and Ex. PW9/I. However, the FSL report dated 25.06.2013 Ex. F1 clarified that no traces of petrol were found in the said steel glass. Furthermore, ld. defence counsel has rightly pointed out that no investigation was conducted to see whether scooter was having any petrol in it. On this aspect, IO (PW9) deposed that he cannot say whether the petrol can be removed from the scooter with the help of steel glass. Further, he had mentioned that the deceased had informed him that she had seen the accused while taking out petrol from the scooter, but she did not tell anything about the manner of taking out petrol from the scooter in steel glass. However, it is evident that neither the deceased had disclosed such facts in dying declaration nor her supplementary statement was recorded in this regard. Second IO (PW14) had also deposed that he did not investigate whether the said scooter was in running condition. Furthermore, PW9 had also mentioned that he did not try to find out the ownership Page No. 19 of 24. State Vs. Raj Kumar; FIR No. 12/13 of PS J.P. Kalan.
20 of the said scooter. In the absence of confirmation on the part of the IO that the said scooter was in running condition or having petrol in it at the time of incident, the plea of defence that the said scooter was lying in adjoining plot of DW5 as scrap and it was not belonging to the accused, since as per the ownership details produced by DW6, one Raj Dev S/o Sh. Daya Nand R/o Bahadurgarh, Haryana, was its owner, cannot be ruled out. Furthermore, it is found that no investigation was conducted to see as to why seven burnt matchsticks were found at the spot.
23. Further, ld. defence counsel emphasized that the deceased had committed suicide since she was under depression and there was suicidal tendency in her family. On this aspect, the brother of the deceased (PW2) had confirmed the aforesaid facts while replying that her mother committed suicide under depression because of cancer and his sister had also consumed poison once. He also admitted that the deceased was under
depression. Further, in his defence, the accused produced DW8 Dr. Ravikant Guglani to show that in the year 2011, the deceased was taken to his clinic and she was having complaints of loss of sleep, headache, giddiness, suicidal thoughts etc. In Page No. 20 of 24. State Vs. Raj Kumar; FIR No. 12/13 of PS J.P. Kalan.
21 view of this Court, the aforesaid evidence related to medical condition of the deceased is sufficient to create reasonable doubt on the prosecution case of homicidal death and at the same time, it strengthens the plea of defence that the death was suicidal.
24. In view of above, it is clear that the prosecution has not been able to bring on record any corroborative evidence to prove the allegations.
25. Moreover, the dying declaration does not disclose any plausible reason for committing the serious offence of murder, as it only mentions that the accused used to torture or beat the deceased. It is silent as to why the quarrel took place between the deceased and her husband soon before the incident. It is difficult to believe that a husband would kill his wife only because of routine quarrels. In the disclosure statement of the accused, it has come that he killed his wife because she was of loose character, but no investigation was conducted to ascertain the true reason. Further, it is noteworthy that there is no evidence on record to show that the deceased was ever harassed in connection with dowry demands. Admittedly, the deceased or her family members had never given any police complaint Page No. 21 of 24. State Vs. Raj Kumar; FIR No. 12/13 of PS J.P. Kalan.
22 against the accused. Even IO has mentioned that the deceased did not allege any dowry demand against the accused. Thus, the prosecution has failed to show any motive for alleged murder.
26. Further, ld. defence counsel also argued that the accused had no intention to kill his wife as he had even tried to save her and in the process, he had also suffered some burn injuries. The MLC of the accused dated 01.02.2013 (2.30 pm), which is on record and now marked Ex. X, corroborates the said plea. It clearly reflects that the accused had burn injuries in the wrist area and umbilicus. Further, the MLC of the deceased also shows that she was brought to the hospital by the relatives. PW3, who examined the deceased, failed to give any explanation as to why the name of the relatives, who had brought the deceased to the hospital, were not mentioned in the MLC Ex. PW3/A. The MLCs of the accused and the deceased were prepared by Dr. Anil Yadav (PW3), but it is quite surprising that he has deposed that he does not know whether the accused had admitted the deceased in the hospital and whether he had also examined the accused for his burn injuries. In view of this, it appears that the accused had attempted to save the deceased from the fire and in the process, he had also suffered burn Page No. 22 of 24. State Vs. Raj Kumar; FIR No. 12/13 of PS J.P. Kalan.
23 injuries and further, he had taken her to the hospital and that is why his MLC was prepared about two hours after the preparation of MLC of the deceased in the same hospital. Thus, the subsequent conduct of the accused points towards his innocence.
27. It is also pertinent to mention here that in the MLC Ex. PW3/A and the testimony of PW3, it has come that the deceased disclosed during her dying declaration that when her husband set her on fire, her brotherinlaw (Sajan Kumar) tried to save her, but could not succeed, however, dying declaration is silent on this aspect. Moreover, Sajan Kumar (PW13) has also not said even about his presence at the time of incident. This material contradiction is another example to indicate that the proceedings were not conducted in fair manner in the hospital. It would not be wrong to say that the role of PW3 had remained quite dubious throughout.
28. In view of discussion made above, it is held that the evidence on record is quite insufficient to record a finding that the accused had subjected the deceased to cruelty at any point of time and that he committed the murder of his wife by pouring Page No. 23 of 24. State Vs. Raj Kumar; FIR No. 12/13 of PS J.P. Kalan.
24 petrol on her and setting her ablaze.
CONCLUSION:
29. For the reasons recorded above, this Court is of the opinion that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt in respect of any charge and accordingly, the accused is pronounced not guilty in respect of offences u/s 498A and 302 IPC.
Announced in the open Court on 11th day of May 2017.
(total 24 pages) (VIVEK KUMAR GULIA) ASJ03 & Special Judge (Companies Act) Dwarka Courts (SW), New Delhi.
Page No. 24 of 24. State Vs. Raj Kumar; FIR No. 12/13 of PS J.P. Kalan.