Delhi District Court
State vs . Vikas Thakur For The Offence ... on 22 September, 2009
IN THE COURT OF SH. SATINDER KUMAR GAUTAM,
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE( WEST-04) , DELHI.
SC NO. 132/1/2009
State
Versus
Vikas Thakur,
S/o Chandra Pal Singh,
R/o A-882/2, Shashtri Nagar, Delhi.
(i)Case arising out of FIR No. 369/05
U/S: 306 IPC
P.S. Sarai Rohilla
(ii) Date of FIR 17.7.2005
(iii) Date of Institution 22.7.2006
(iv) Date of Final Arguments 20.8.2009
(v) Judgment reserved on 29.8.2009
(iv) Date of judgment 11/09/09
JUDGMENT
This judgment shall dispose of the case titled as State Vs. Vikas Thakur for the offence punishable u/s 306 IPC of P.S. Sarai Rohilla vide FIR No. 369/2005.
The accused Vikas Thakur S/o Chandra Pal Singh has been facing trial on the allegation that on 12.7.2005 Babita Kumari D/o Sh. Mahipal Singh committed suicide in the morning time at her house i.e. C-105, Delhi Contd..........
/2/ Administration Flats, Sindhora Kala, Delhi and he abetted the commission of said suicide by way of refusal of solemnize marriage with her despite his promise to marry with the said Babita Kumari and the accused was having love affairs with her for the last about more than three years and thereby he abetted the commission of her suicide on 22.6.2005 and after wards when the accused specifically refused to marry with Babita Kumari she ultimately committed suicide on 12.7.2005. Information to this effect was recorded vide DD No.14A in P.S Sarai Rohilla and SI Subhash Ct. Ashok reached at DDA Flats, C-105, Sindhora Kalan found deceased Babita lying dead inside the room. Parents of the deceased, Mahipal Singh and Nirmala Devi and another neighbourer were present near the bed of deceased one polythene and one chunni found and seized both polythene and chunni. Dead body was sent through Ct. Ashok to mortuary Subzi Mandi. SI Subhash Chand recorded the statement of parents and the neighbourer Nirmala, called crime team at the spot, photographs of the deceased mark W,X,Y and Z were taken, Post mortem on the dead body of deceased was got conducted and after post mortem the dead body was handed over to the parents of the deceased Babita.
Thereafter, on 17.09.2005 Mahipal father of deceased gave a complaint Ex.PW1/B on which rukka vide Ex.PW7/A was prepared on the Contd..........
/3/ basis of which present case was registered. SI Subhash Chand reached at the spot and prepared site plan Ex.PW7/B. The father of deceased produced several letters i.e. 14 in number marked A-1 to A-13 found in the house which were seized vide memo Ex.PW1/C. IO/SI Subhash also seized a letter written by deceased in red ink mark A-14 which was seized vide memo Ex.PW1/D, recorded the statements of witnesses and also taken on record the print outs of the floppy given by the father of the deceased and the said print outs are mark A-15 to A-21. The IO SI Subhash Chand further collected the post mortem report Ex.PW4/A and also filled up the request form for performing autopsy on the body which is Ex.PW7/D. As per the statements of the witnesses deceased had committed the suicide putting polythene on her face and tightening it with a chunni on account of the refusal of the accused to marry her. Accused Vikas Thakur was granted anticipatory bail and released the accused on bail vide his personal bond Ex.PW7/G and surety bond Ex.PW7/H. After completion of investigation challan was filed before the court.
A prima facie offence is made out against the accused as such vide order dated 24.8.2006 charged for offence punishable u/s 306 IPC was framed, for which accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
Contd..........
/4/ To substantiate the allegation against the accused prosecution cited 8 witnesses in the list of witnesses and examined 7 witnesses which include PW1 Mahipal Singh, PW2 Anjan Kumar, PW3 ASI Ram Kumar, PW4 Dr. Ashok Jaiswal , PW5 Smt. Nirmala, PW6 Ct. Ashok Kumar and PW7 SI Subhash Chand.
PW1 Mahipal Singh is the father of the deceased Babita Kumari who in his examination has deposed that his daughter Babita has committed suicide on 12.7.2005. Before that she had gone to his sister's house on her son's birthday i.e on 20.6.2005 and she stayed there for three days. Vikas Thakur accused was the class mate of his daughter deceased Babita during her college days and even after also. On 22.6.2005 accused Vikas Thakur rang to his daughter Babita and talked with her after that her daughter become tensed . PW1 further deposed that on 23.6.2005 accused Vikas Thakur came to his house and had some talk with her daughter Babita and in the evening his daughter was not feeling well then he took her to the doctor under the impression that she was not physically well. She continued taking medicines for some days but her condition did not find improve and she was informed by the doctor that his daughter Babita was running under depression.
Contd..........
/5/ PW1 has further stated that on 12.7.2005 while he, his wife and his two sons had come to the court in connection with a case and h is daughter Babita was alone in the house and when they came back to the house found she is lying on the bed after covering her face in polythene and tightening the same with a chunni and found dead. Immediately he called for the doctor and there after gave intimation to police station Sarai Rohilla. The police reached his house and after wards SDM also came there and inspected the site and prepared some proceedings and dead body was removed by police for postmortem. He had identified dead body of his daughter and got recorded his statement Ex. PW1/A. Next day post mortem was conducted by the concerned doctor and they received the dead body of their deceased daughter Babita. PW1 has further deposed t hat during the search of house they found 13 letters written by Vikas Thakur to h is daughter Babita from time to time. Their common friend Anjan also gave him one letter written by Babita to accused Vikas Thakur and photocopies of some E mail letters send by Babita to Vikas Thakur. One letter written in red ink as produced to her by Anjan on 2.8.2005 mark A-14. PW1 has deposed that Babita got a shock of her life when Vikas Thakur suddenly refused to marry her after a prolonged relationship and declaration Contd..........
/6/ amongst friend circle and she went into depression and it is out of the depression, she committed suicide.
In his cross examination PW1 Mahipal Singh deposed that he has not handed over the mobile phone of his daughter Babita to the IO because no phone calls made by the accused Vikas Thakur on her mobile phone. PW1 has further deposed that his statement was recorded by police on 12.7.2005 and after about 12-13 days of death of his daughter Babita, he searched and obtained some letter of his daughter Babita and had not delivered one floppy, one CD and some greeting cards to the police as it was not demanded by them from him. He further admitted that in Mark A-23 the name of his daughter Babita or accused Vikas Thakur is not mentioned and admitted that the contents of writing as per mark A-14 are similar to the content of mark A 23. He further deposed that neither the name of Babita, Vikas Thakur or the date is mentioned in Mark A-14, however, name of Anjan is found mentioned there in. He denied that the content of the letter of Babita is manipulated one and Accused Vikas had never refused to proposal of marriage with Babita. PW1 further denied that he was having knowledge of the love affairs between the accused and his daughter Babita ½ month prior to the incident and that is why he had locked her in the house Contd..........
/7/ on 12.7.2005 when they went for the court. It is also denied that they were not ready for marriage of Babita with the accused that is why she committed suicide and also denied the rest of the suggestion.
Pw5 Nirmala is the mother of the deceased Babita and has deposed that she is a house wife and had three children namely Saurav, Alok and Babita. Babita her daughter now is deceased. On 12.07.2005 she alongwith her husband and both sons had come to Tis Hazari Court to attend a case and Babita her daughter was left alone at the house. When they return to the house saw Babita lying on the bed and her face was also covered with the polythene and she was found dead. Her daughter Babita (deceased) was studying in B.A. in Satyawati College Ashok Vihar and accused Vikas was also student of Satyawati College and he often used to visit our house. In between the month of March & May the accused had proposed to her that he was wishing to marry her daughter Babita and he further told not to disclose this thing to Babita. After some time the accused told her that his relatives, Tauji etc. were refusing to the said marriage as the girl Babita was handicap having defect in her leg.
Contd..........
/8/ PW5 Nirmala further deposed that on 21.06.2005 her daughter Babita had gone to Rohini at the house of her Bua for attending the birthday of Kartik and after coming from there, she was disturbed. She came to know that accused Vikas had also gone there at Rohini and after meeting Babita there he had left. All these facts were revealed to her after the death of her daughter Babita. PW5 Nirmala further deposed that in the month of June 2005, one Anjan common friend of Vikas and her daughter Babita gave her one envelope which was sealed and he had also told that those articles contained in the envelope were given to him by Babita to hand over the same to Vikas and the said envelope was kept by her in their house and after about two - three days of the death of Babita they opened the said envelope and found to contain CDs, Floppy and letters. The said CDs, Floppy and letters were given to the police by her husband after the death of their daughter Babita the CDs and Floppy were returned to them by the police and the letters which were 14/16 in numbers were taken into possession by the police. One letter written by Babita in red ink which is Mark A-14 was also in those letters seized by the police and it is in the hand writing of Babita. Her daughter might have committed suicide due to the fact the accused Vikas Contd..........
/9/ refused to marry with her and for this reason her B.P. was too low prior some days of her death.
In her cross examination by Ld. Defence Counsel, PW5 deposed that on 12.07.2005 a criminal case was pending in Tis Hazari court and she, alongwith husband, her two sons, came to attend. In that case herself alongwith her husband and both the sons were accused. On that day they reached the court before 10.00 AM. Anjan came to her on 4/5 July 2005 and he told her to take care of Babita as "she was in depression". She did not know what was her blood pressure. Her neighbour Nirmla also came to their house on their arrival from Tis Hazari Court and she removed the polythene and Chunni from the face of her daughter Babita. Anjan used to visit their house sometimes. She further stated that earlier the accused had agreed for marriage with her daughter but thereafter once he came to her house and stated that operation of his foot was to be done till then he would not be able to marry with her daughter. She further denied that due to the fact that they were against the marriage of her daughter so her daughter had committed suicide. It is also denied that she had stated to the SDM that her daughter being a lame person and being under depression had committed suicide and she is deposing falsely against the accused just to falsely implicate him.
Contd..........
/10/ PW2 Anjan Kumar is the close friend of Babita and Vikas all of them were studying in Satyawati Collage Ashok Vihar from 1998-2001 and they were having knowledge regarding the personal affairs of each other. There was love affairs between deceased Babita and Vikas Thakur and both wanted to get marry with each other and have took decision in this respect. About two months prior to the incident. Vikas Thakur had intimated to the mother of Babita deceased that he was ready to get marriage with Babita. PW2 further deposed that Vikas Thakur got difficulty in obtaining consent of his parents for said marriage and he intimated about this to deceased Babita and assured that it will take some time to make understand his parents about said marriage. It was intimated by Vikas Thakur that his parents are not agreeable for the said marriage and it will take time to convince them and when he tried to make understand about this aspect to deceased Babita, she responded that the parents of Vikas Thakur appears to be strict and cannot be convinced for said marriage and thereafter Babita left the place while weeping.
PW2 Anjan Kumar Sen has further deposed that about eight days prior to the incident deceased Babita had rang him and intimated that Contd..........
/11/ she was in too depression and may commit suicide as she was under
impression that Vikas Thakur might not convinced his parent for his marriage with Babita. Immediately , after disconnected the said phone call from Babita, he talked to mother of Babita by phone and asked her to take care of Babita as she might take any wrong step. PW2 has also deposed that about 15-16 days prior to the incident, he had gone to the house of Babita and Babita had delivered one packet and one letter to be handing over the same to Vikas. However said packet was taken by the mother of Babita from him outside the colony. One day prior to the incident, Babita intimated him on phone that she had sent one letter by E mail to Vikas and asked him to intimate Vikas to check said E mail and he intimated Vikas Thakur in th is respect on the same evening. On the day of incident, he came to know regarding commission of suicide by Babita from mother of Babita as she informed on phone. He intimated to father of Babita that Babita had delivered him earlier one letter for handing over the same to Vikas Thakur but the same was lying with him and he delivered back said letter of Babita to her father after about eight days of the incident. The said letter is marked as A-14.
Contd..........
/12/ In cross examination of Ld. Defence Counsel, PW2 has stated that after seeing the letter mark A14 he cannot tell, who wrote the same. He also cannot say who is the writer of letter mark A14. He further admitted that the factum of love affairs between Vikas Thakur and Babita was within the knowledge of parents of Babita. The factum regarding the going on love affairs between Vikas Thakur and Babita was in confirmed knowledge of parents of Babita about two months prior to the incident and while t hey were sitting in the Panditji Ka Dhaba near Satyawati Collage, accused Vikas Thakur had told that he will try to convince h is parents for agreeing for his marriage with deceased Babita. The accused Vikas Thakur had been assuring all the time to Babita that he will convince his parents for said marriage and will get marry with her. On 12.7.2005, on being informed about the incident from mother of Babita, Anjan reached their house at about 12 noon and came back from there at about 6 pm. He further deposed that he visited the house of Babita on 12.7.2005 , 13.7.2005 and 14.7.2005 and also stated that accused Vikas Thakur always tried to see smiling face of deceased Babita.
The other PWs are PW3 ASI Ram Kumar has deposed about registration of FIR and also about recording of DD No. 15/A vide E x. PW3/A to PW3/C. Contd..........
/13/ PW4 Dr. Ashok Jaiswal, conducted the post mortem on the dead body of deceased Babita on request of SI Subhash Chand of P.S. Sarai Rohilla and give his finding in proved in report vide Ex. PW4/A and opined the cause of death by cutting of oxygen supply by the plastic bag covering head and neck. Time since death was about one day. PW6 Ct. Ashok Kumar was alongwith IO, gone to the house of deceased Babita on a call and after conducting the proceeding at the spot IO handed over the dead body of deceased Babita to him which he taken to the Mortuary Subzi Mandi for its post mortem.
PW7 SI Subhash Chand is the Investigating Officer of the case and deposed that on 12.07.2005 while posted at PS Sarai Rohilla, on receipt of DD No.14A, he alongwith Ct. Ashok reached at D.A. Flats, C-105, Sindhora Kalan found deceased Babita lying inside the room. Parents of the deceased, Mahipal Singh and Nirmala Devi and another neighbourer lady Nirmala was present. Near the bed of deceased one polythene and one chunni found. He seized both polythene and chunni. Dead body was sent through Ct. Ashok to mortuary Subzi Mandi. He had recorded the statement of parents and the neighbourer Nirmala, called crime team at the spot, photographs of the deceased mark W,X,Y and Z were taken, post mortem on the dead body of deceased was got conducted and the dead body was handed over to the parents of the deceased.
Contd..........
/14/ PW7 SI Subhash Chand further deposed that thereafter, on 17.09.2005 Mahipal father of deceased gave a complaint Ex.PW1/B on which he recorded his endorsement Ex.PW7/A and gave rukka to Duty Officer, on the basis of which case was registered. He reached at the spot and prepared site plan Ex.PW7/B. The father of deceased produced several letters i.e. 14 in number which are marked A-1 to A-13 found in the house which he had seized vide memo Ex.PW1/C. He had also seized a floppy and letter written by deceased in red ink mark A-14, vide seizure memo Ex.PW1/D. He also recorded the statements of witnesses. The print outs of the floppy taken by the father of the deceased are mark A-15 to A-21 and collected the post mortem report Ex.PW4/A. He has also filled in the request form for performing autopsy on the body vide Ex.PW7/D. Copy of the DD No. 14A Ex.PW7/E. The seizure memo of chunni and polythene was prepared vide Ex.PW7/F. As per the statements of the witnesses, deceased had committed the suicide wearing polythene on her face and tightening it with a chunni, on account of depression due to refusal of the accused to marry her and identified the chunni and polythene vide Ex. P1 and P2.
In his cross examination by Ld. Defence Counsel, PW7 SI Subhash Chand has deposed that he recorded the statements of Mahipal, Contd..........
/15/ Nirmala Devi and one neighbour Nirmala when reached at the spot for the first time. On the first day, Mahipal did not disclose to him about the love affair of her daughter and had not disclosed any reason for committing suicide by Babita but Mahipal informed that his daughter was a handicapped person. He further deposed that the mother of Babita, Nirmala Devi informed him on the first day that Babita used to go to college on every Sunday and she used to be escorted by her father to her college. Nirmala Devi informed him that her daughter used to remain in the house, most of the time used to watch T.V. The parents of deceased also informed him that on the day of incident, they had gone to court and had locked their house from outside while Babita was inside. When he reached at the spot initially on first instance the polythene and chunni were not on the face of the deceased but lying separately and at the time of taking photographs, the polythene and chunni were placed on the face of the deceased which was done at the time of post mortem. He himself carried the camera and had taken these photographs. When he reached at the spot the polythene and chunni were not covered on the face of the deceased. He had picked up the same from the spot and come to know from the statements of parents of the deceased that deceased had committed suicide by wearing polythene on her Contd..........
/16/ face and tightening it with the chunni. On enquiry from the parents as to who removed the chunni and polythene from the face of the deceased, they told that they had removed the same from the face of the deceased. Both the brothers of the deceased had come at the spot after some time. The polythene and chunni were placed again on the face of the deceased at the instructions of doctors before the post mortem by some of the staff of the hospital. He did not record the statement of any person to this effect. On his enquiry as to why the lock was put by the parents when they left to court, they told him that the door of the flat was such that if it is closed from inside then anybody from outside can open the kunda of door by inserting hand so taking care of the safety of their daughter who being a handicap person they had put lock on the door from outside. He did not call the area SDM at the spot for the purpose of inquest proceeding. When he had asked the father of deceased to give the handwritings of the deceased, he had refused for providing the same. From 12.07.2005 till 17.09.2005, no one had approached with any complaint. He was given the letters by the father of the deceased and told that these were the letters written between the accused and the deceased. As per statement of Anjan, he has told that accused had refused to marry Babita in his presence and Babita had come back while weeping.
Contd..........
/17/ PW7 SI Subhash Chand in cross examination of defence counsel denied that no such statement was given to him by Sh. Anjan. Anjan had also signed the said statement. He had visited the Pandit-Ji-Ka Dhaba where accused, deceased and Anjan used to meet, he could not find the Panditji to join the enquiry. He further denied that Anjan did not tell him regarding refusal of marry by accused with Babita or that he had of his own written such statement of Anjan. He did not place the signed statement of Anjan on the judicial file. He further denied that no such statement of Anjan is existing or recorded and therefore it is not placed on judicial file and he is deposing falsely. PW7 has further denied that he did not carry proper investigation in the matter and falsely implicated the accused in the matter.
After completion of prosecution evidence, statement of accused u/s 313 Cr.P.C recorded. All the incriminating evidence led by prosecution were put to the accused to which he denied the same and deposed that he was ready to marry with the deceased Babita but their parents were not agreed for the same. However, he had tried to convince his parents regarding their marriage but parents of the deceased Babita had not agreed or convinced for the marriage because at that time he was a temporary employee and earning small salary. The accused has also Contd..........
/18/ refused to lead evidence in his defence. The accused admitted correspondence of letters between him and deceased however denied the letter mark A-14 with the contention that same is fabricated.
I have heard the submission of Ld. APP for State, Ld. Counsel for the accused and also carefully gone through the material placed on record and the citations cited by them.
Ld. APP for State submitted that the prosecution has successfully proved its case against the accused beyond all reasonable doubts. Since testimony of prosecution witnesses are trustworthy, believable and corroborative even though the accused in his statement also admitted that there was a love affairs between him and deceased Babita. His parents was not agreed he tried to convinced his parents for their marriage. It is further contended by Ld. APP that letter written by accused are admitted on his handwriting. PW2 Anjan Kumar Senhas also admitted the letter and the floppy given by deceased Babita to be handover to the accused and hence it clearly proved from the statement of prosecution witnesses that the deceased Babita has committed suicide as the accused Vikas Thakur has refused to marry with her despite the love affairs with her. The act of refusal to marry despite promising or knowing of all, is tantamount to abatement Therefore, accused Vikas Thakur is liable to be convicted under section 306 IPC.
Contd..........
/19/ Per contra, Ld. Defence Counsel argued that as per the story of the prosecution deceased Babita, Vikas and their common friend Anjan i.e. PW2 had met together at the Pandit Ji Ka Dhaba at Ashok Vihar, Delhi where as per the version of complainant the accused refused to marry with deceased Babita and this fact has been told by their common friend Anjan to the complainant. It is important to mention here that as per the prosecution it was the last meeting between the deceased Babita and accused Vikas Thakur and the entire story of the prosecution is based on the statement of PW2 Anjan, whereas Anjan did not utter a single word regarding the refusal of marriage by the accused with deceased Babita. Further there is no PW had ever stated that the accused ever effort to solemnized marriage with deceased in their presence and there is no iota on the record to show that the accused Vikas Thakur ever instigated deceased Babita to commit suicide.
Ld. Defence counsel has further argued that section 306 IPC was not made out against the accused as if we read section 306 IPC alongwith Section 107 IPC so no case is made out against the accused persons as mentioned above. Further as per the complaint Ex. PW1/B of complainant it is stated that " on 23.6.2005, Vikas visited our house had some talk with Babita and left after some time. On 24.6.2005 she left after some time. On Contd..........
/20/ 24.6.2005 she left the house in the morning saying that she was going to DIET Office at Moti Bagh in connection with her Primary Teacher Training Certificate. Anjan also reported that on that day he was with both of them and they had met at the Ashok Vihar Restaurant which they often visited and had last visited on 22.6.2005 only two days earlier. When she left them that day also she was very upset as Vikas again refused for their marriage. This fact has not been supported by PW2 Anjan and this shows that conduct of complainant as to how he improve or tried to implicate accused falsely in the present case. Further the floppy as alleged has never been handed over to the IO and letter Ex. A-14 is manipulated document as the complainant stated in his cross examination that "I cannot say who is the writer of letter Mark -A14". It shows that the letter had not been written by deceased at any point of time and same was manufactured by the complainant to falsely implicated the accused in the present case that is why the complainant did not provide the hand writing of the deceased Babita to the Investigating Officer.
It is further argued by Ld. Defence Counsel that the incident had taken place on 12.7.2005 and the father of deceased/complainant at the Contd..........
/21/ time of inquest proceedings did not utter a single word about any refusal of marriage. It is further submitted that the complainant was keep mum from 12.7.2005 till 7.8.2005, when firstly he made a complaint Ex. PW1/B, which shown that this time has been utilized by the complainant to manufacture the documents and concocted the false story to implicate the accused in the present case. Further in respect of alleged letter it is argued by Ld. Defence Counsel that these letters are very much with the possession of complainant prior to the incident as is clear from the statement of complainant as well as of PW2 Anjan but this fact has been concealed by the complainant to manipulate the same by saying the said letter have been communicated by Anjan to him after the incident or letters had been discovered from the almirah of the deceased. Whereas, PW2 stated as the letter and packet has been received by the mother of the deceased i.e. PW5 Smt. Nirmala much prior to incident but she did not disclose the same earlier and such conduct of PW5, shows that she was not happy with the relation between the deceased Babita and accused Vikas Thakur.
Ld. Defence Counsel also pleaded that deceased Babita has a mobile No. 9871263337 which is mention in complaint and it is very unfortunate on the part of investigation that he has not handed over the said cell to the IO, it would have been given to the IO and IO can obtained the Contd..........
/22/ call details from the cell. Actually what happened when the parent of deceased came to know the love affair said mobile phone has been snatched by the parents of the deceased from her possession that's why the complainant not able to hand over the mobile cell to the Investigating Officer. This conduct of the complainant is also thrown a serious doubt upon the prosecution story. Further the incident is dated 12.7.2005 and FIR was registered in the present case on 7.8.2005 as much delay to register the FIR has not been explained. The statement of PW1 and PW5 are totally on the basis of hearsay, as they have no personal knowledge about the said incident. Further the star witness of prosecution i.e. PW2 Anjan has never supported the version of prosecution regarding refusal of marriage by the accused with the deceased Babita in his presence. The PW2 Anjan clearly stated that "accused Vikas Thakur has been assuring all the time to Babita that he will convince his parent for their marriage and will get marry with her and always tried to see smiling face of deceased Babita"
Ld. Defence Counsel also relied upon a case titled as Kishori Lal Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh cited as 2007 (3) CC Cases (SC) 102 and submitted that in the said mentioned judgment the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that "no case of instigations made out where there is no direct or Contd..........
/23/ indirect instigation have been made by the accused to commission of an offence. In the present case there is no iota on record to show that the accused ever instigated the deceased Babita to commit suicide. The PW2 Anjan in his deposition stated that " The Vikas Thakur always tried to see the smiling face of Babita" and even as per the statement of PWs and documents on record, there is no iota of evidence on record to show that the accused ever instigate, abet or provoke the deceased Babita at any occasion to commit suicide. Further more, there is no iota on record to show that the present accused had every refused to marry or instigate or abet at any time or intentionally aided either directly or indirectly to the deceased to take extreme step to commit suicide. Hence in view of aforesaid, no case is made out against the accused u/s 306 IPC and he is liable to be acquitted.
In view of the submission of Ld. APP for State and Ld. Defence Counsel as well as material placed on record, for the purpose of attracting offence u/s 306 IPC, section 107 IPC is to be taken into consideration. It is made clear that the persons to be charged for offence u/s 306 IPC, that is abetment of suicide, the abetment should be such as would fall within the definition of section 107 IPC. Section 107 IPC broadly categorizes, and , Contd..........
/24/ defines abetment as constituting:
(i) Instigating a person to commit an offence;
(ii) Engaging in a conspiracy to commit such an offence; or
(iii) Intentionally aiding a person to commit an offence.
The prosecution have to shown from the material on record that the accused instigating the deceased i.e. goads, urges, provokes, incites and even encouraged the deceased to commit suicide. Secondly the accused intended the aid or encourage the commission of the principal offence. The most relevant material would be the circumstances as created by the accused , reluctant attitude of his and his parents and corresponding love letter Ex. A-1 to A23 and the suicide note Mark A-14 written by the deceased. It is common knowledge that the words uttered in a quarrel or on the spur of the moment cannot be taken to be uttered with mens rea. It is in a fit of anger and emotion. While insulting someone, the assailant must have had the intention to provoke, incite, urge or encourage the deceased to commit suicide.
The word " instigate" denotes incitement or urging to do some drastic or inadvisable action or to stimulate or incite. Advise per se cannot Contd..........
/25/ necessarily be instigation, instigation involves two things, one is a physical act or omission while the other is mental act. Physical act of goading can be committed either by words or deed. But, apart from such physical act or omission, such person must also have the intention to provoke, incite or urge or encourage doing of an act by the other.
In order to convict a person of abetting the commission of crime, it is not only necessary to prove that he has taken part in those steps of the transaction which are hearsay, but in some way or other it is absolutely necessary to connect him with those steps of the transaction with are criminal It is necessary to prove criminal intention without the approval and connivance of accused is not sufficient to prove the abetment.
As per section 108 of IPC which defines the offence of abatement is complete, notwithstanding that the person abetted refuses to do the thing or fails in voluntarily in doing it, or does it and the expected result does not follow. In order to constitute abetment it is not necessary that the offence which is said to have been abetted must be committed. The offence of abetment by instigation depends upon the intention of the person who abets, and not upon the act which is actually done by the person whom he abets.
The accusation made against the accused is that he abetted the Contd..........
/26/ deceased Babita to commit suicide since the accused refused to solemnize the marriage with her despite promises to marry with said Babita since having being love affairs with her and due to the said reason she ultimately committed suicide on 12.7.2005. From a reading of provision of section 107 IPC under clause third clause of Section 107 IPC, a person is said to have abetted the thing by aiding, if the act aided is committed, in order to make such aiding an offence. It is also necessary to refer to the definition of "Aid" . According the Oxford Dictionary, aid is defined as 'a person or thing that helps or encourages'. Reverting to the case in hand from a narration of the events and from the contention of the Ld. APP it appear the suicidal thought brought in the mind and the deceased Babita committed suicide as solely on the account of refusal of reluctant attitude of the accused to marry with deceased Babita despite being promises and make it public. So now the point for determination is whether the refusal of the accused amounts to intentional aiding , as defined under the third clause of section 107 IPC.
PW1 Mahipal Singh father of the deceased deposed in his statement before the court that "On 22.6.2005 accused Vikas Thakur rang to his daughter Babita and talked with her after that her daughter become Contd..........
/27/ tensed . On 23.6.2005 accused Vikas Thakur came to their house and had some talk with her daughter Babita and in the evening his daughter was not feeling well then he took her to the doctor under the impression that she was not physically well. She continued taking medicines for some days but her condition did not find improve and he was informed by the doctor that his daughter Babita was running under depression....... from these letters he learnt that a love affairs had been going on between his daughter Babita and Vikas Thakur for a long time. From Anjan he also learnt that on 22.6.2005 Vikas Thakur had told her that he would not marry her although they had declared their intention to marry amongst all the friends for quite some time. In one letter Vikas Thakur had proposed to marry her during the summer vacation that very year or some time in winter and had asked her to tell him when she would like to do it. On 22.6.2005 Vikas Thakur, Babita and Anjan had also visited a Restaurant in Ashok Vihar, Delhi and there also he had told her that he could not marry her. Anjan had advised him to reconsider his decision and if at all they could not marry then informed the parents of Babita. Babita got shock of her life Contd..........
/28/ when Vikas Thakur suddenly refused to marry her after a prolonged relationship and declaration among friend circle and she went in to depression and it is out of that depression she committed suicide."
PW1 Mahipal Singh was also cross examined and in cross examination, it is denied that accused Vikas had never refused to proposal of marriage of Babita. It is also denied that he was having knowledge of the love affairs between the accused and his daughter Babita ½ months prior to the incident and that is why he had locked her in the house on 12.7.2005. It is also denied by PW1 Mahipal Singh that they were not ready for marriage of Babita with the accused that is why she committed suicide.
PW2 Anjan Kumar in his statement stated that "Vikas Thakur got difficulty in obtaining consent of his parents for said marriage and he intimated about this to deceased Babita and assured that it will take some time to make understand his parents about said marriage. He was intimated by Vikas Thakur that his parents are not agreeable for the said marriage and it will take time to convince them and when he tried to make understand about this aspect to deceased Babita, she responded that the parents of Vikas Thakur appears to be strict and cannot be convinced for Contd..........
/29/ said marriage and thereafter Babita left the place while weeping....... He also intimated to the mother of Babita by phone and asked her to take care of Babita as she might take any wrong step. He also delivered floppy and letters of Babita to her mot her which was to he handed over to Vikas Thakur. He also intimated to the father of Babita that the Babita had delivered earlier one letter for handing over the same to Vikas Thakur but the same was lying with him and he delivered back said letter of Babita to her fat her after about eight days of the incident. Said letter is Ex. P-14 is available in the case file.
In cross examination PW2 Anjan Kumar Sen admitted that the Vikas Thakur has given assurance to Babita that he will convince his parents for the said marriage and will get marry with her.
Another crucial witness of the event is PW5 Smt. Nirmala Devi, the mother of the deceased she deposed that the "Vikas Thakur used to visit at her house and also proposed to marry with her daughter Babita and told that not to disclose this fact to Babita. After some time the accused told her that his relative, Tauji etc. were refusing to the said marriage as Contd..........
/30/ the girl Babita was handicap having defect in her leg. On 21.06.2005 her daughter Babita had gone to Rohini at the house of her Bua for attending the birthday of Kartik and after coming from there she was disturbed. She came to know that accused Vikas had also gone there at Rohini and after meeting Babita there he had left. In the month of June 2005, one Anjan common friend of Vikas and her daughter Babita gave her one envelope which was sealed and he had also told that those articles contained in the envelope were given to him by Babita to hand over the same to Vikas and the said envelope was kept by her in our house and after about two - three days of the death of Babita they opened the said envelope and found to contain CDs, Floppy and letters. The said CDs, Floppy and letters were given to the police by her husband after the death of their daughter Babita....... One letter written by Babita in red ink which is Mark A was also in those letters seized by the police and it is in the hand writing of Babita. Her daughter might have committed suicide due to the fact the accused Vikas refused to marry with her and for this reason her B.P. was too low prior some days of her death."
Contd..........
/31/ In cross examination PW5 Nirmala Devi denied that father and Jeeja of accused had come to her house and she and her husband had refused the proposal of marriage . Earlier the accused had agreed for marriage with his daughter but thereafter once he came to her house and stated that operation of his foot was to be done till then he would not be able t o marry with her daughter. It is denied that accused Vikas Thakur never refused to marry her daughter. It is also denied that accused wanted to marry her daughter and she and her husband were against the marriage of her daughter so her daughter had committed suicide. It is also denied that she had stated to the SDM that her daughter being a lame person and being under depression had committed suicide.
Refusal of marry, if can be said ultimately make the other person to commit suicide the it can definitely be said that the person who refused to may has intentionally aided. From the letter mark A-14 and Mark A-23 it is depicted that " Tum thik nahin kar rahe ho. Kuch Palon ki hushiyon ke liye zindagi barbad nahin ki ja sakti. Tumhe pata hai tum kisi aur ko who pyar nahin de sakte aur na mujh main yet himmat hai ki kisi aur ke bistar par bich sakoon kisi aur ki marzi ke aage apni aatma, apne sharir ko roz Contd..........
/32/ galte dekhoon, tum meri Jaan the, Jaan ke bina sharir bhi nahin hota. Waiting for you........"
Ld. Counsel for accused while arguing submitted that these letter are fabricated and the same is not written by the deceased Babita to accused. The said letters is written to Sonu by Bittoo. To all this effect from the perusal of the other letters mark A1 to A23 reference are being made to Sonu and Bittoo and also revealed Sonu is the neck name of the accused Vikas Thakur and Bittoo is the so called name of the deceased Babita. With respect to the hand writing of the letters Ex. P-14, PW2 Anjan Kumar Sen have categorically stated that "...... on the next day after the incident I was called by father of deceased Babita and he informed that said packet was delivered to him by Babita to handover the same to Vikas Thakur but was taken from him by the mother of Babita was found containing floppy, letters of the Babita. He intimated to the father of deceased that Babita had delivered him earlier one letter Mark -A14for handing over the same to Vikas Thakur but the same was lying with him and he delivered back said letter to Babita to her father after about eight days of the incident. Said letter is mark A-14, as available in the case file" It is also admitted Contd..........
/33/ fact that there was a deep love affairs between the deceased Babita and the Vikas Thakur and both wanted to merry. They have also took decision with respect to marriage and also making the dreams for their family and kids. PW2 Anjan Kumar Sen also testified that the Vikas Thakur got difficulty for obtaining the consent from his parents, for the said marriage and he intimated about this to Babita. They all have also gathered at Pandit Ji Ka Dhaba twenty days prior to the incident. Vikas Thakur and the Babita was in sad mood and the accused Vikas Thakur intimated to the Babita that his parent are not agreeable for the said marriage and Babita left the place while weeping and eight days prior to the incident Babita had also rang and intimated him t hat she was too depressed and may commit suicide as she was under impression that Vikas Thakur might not convinced h is parents for his marriage with Babita.
PW2 Anjan Kumar Sen is a independent witness who testified that Vikas Thakur under was not being able to convinced his parents for the marriage with Babita and this fact was intimated to the Babita and she was under the depression. The depression was revealed by her on a telephone and making it clear that she may commit suicide at any time Contd..........
/34/ because Vikas Thakur may not be able to convince his parents who are very strict. PW2 Anjan Kumar Sen has also intimated this fact to the mother of the deceased with a caution to take special care of her as she was under deep depression.
Ld. Defence Counsel have cooked up a story that the parents of the deceased Babita had refused the proposal of the marriage with the Vikas Thakur and his Jija had gone to her house with the proposal and also made suggestion to the PW1 Mahipal Singh and PW5 Nirmala Devi to this effect , which is categorically denied by both PW1 & PW5 and the suggestion made by defence Counsel is contradictory to the suggestion made to the PW2 Anjan Kumar Sen and in the deposition of PW2 Anjan Kumar Sen no where being suggested by Ld. Defence Counsel that the brother in law of the accused and accused has sent to the house of the deceased where her parents have refused the proposal of the marriage. The Defence Counsel also suggested to the PW5 that she made a statement to the SDM that due to depression that her deceased daughter is lame as such committed suicide.
PW2 Anjan Kumar Sen in his examination also revealed that there was a deep love affairs between the deceased Babita and Vikas Thakur. There was a proposal of marriage from the Vikas Thakur. The Contd..........
/35/ accused Vikas Thakur's parents were not agreed for the marriage. He was being tried to pass over the matter with the assurances to the deceased that he will try to convince his parents. The deceased Babita was depressed as the matter of his marriage with the Vikas Thakur cannot be found to be materialized. Before her death she handed over the packets of letter, floppy which is to be handed over to the Vikas Thakur but instead to hand over the same to the accused, PW2 Anjan Kumar Sen handed over the floppy, latter to mother of Babita. The last red ink letter written by Babita from her nick name as Bittoo to Sonu by the nick name of the accused Vikas ( as revealed from other love letter mark A1 to A23 is handed over to her father after about 8 days of the incident. The said letters has been identified as Mark A-
14. From the narrating in the letter A1 to A13 and latter mark A-14 is in the same sequence disclosed the love story between two loving bird i.e. accused Vikas Thakur and deceased Babita. The letter mark A-15 to A-21 are also narrating the stories of their present and future plan lover affair going on between them. In letter Mark A-21, the emotions of the deceased towards the accused while stating that:
" Bye, ab anhin likh sakti, warna phir ro padoongi bahut mushkil se khud ko sabhala hai, tum ne to tadapne ke liye chod Contd..........
/36/ diya tha. Do pyar bhare dil ( jinme dobara bahut sara pyar bharna tumhari responsibility hai, mujhe tum par bharosa hai, tum yeh kar sakte ho) mujhe itna pyar do ki main yeh saari purani baatein bhool jaoon. Phir dekho ki tumhari sari problem main apne dil mein chupa loongi. I promise, main badi jo gayi hoon, hai no thoda bharosa hai mujh par, kar ke dekho, tumhare ghar wale kabhi meri wajah se tumhe kuch bole to tum se jaida mujhe dukh hoga, main kabhi bhi aaisa nahin hone dongi, bharosa hai, mujh par, pyar karte ho mujh se? To bas phir sab thik hi hoga.
Bas, apne khayal rakhna, mere liye, please, tumhare peeche tumhare cahne wale hai , tumhare teen teen bache kaun sambhalega, take care, Tumhare mail ka wail kar rahi, tumhari ho chuki wife ( likhon to calega).............."
Further in letter mark A-20 the deceased stated that " Tumne mere saath bahut partiality ki hai, tumne dost nibhai par pyar ko chod diya, jab main tumhe bulati thi to normaly Contd..........
/37/ tumhara jawab hota that ki kiraya bhaut lagta hai, aur jab neetu yo anjan ka phone aaye to tum hafte mein kai kai baar jaate the yaad hai ya nahin? Us din se main to tumhe apne kaam se kahin bhi le jaana chod diya, na kabhi tumhe milne ke liye force kiya , par shayad tumne kabhi the baat fool hi nahin ki, ki tum mujhe kahan chod gaye the........." and further stated in letter mark A-19 that :
" Main tumhare liye , tumhari family ke liye koi bhi adjustment karne ke liye taiyaar hoon paris baat par ko aadjustment nahin hoga. Kya mera pyar tumhe nazar nahin aata. Aaj tumne mujhe andar se todh diya........."
The accused while examined u/s 313 confronted from the statement of the prosecution stated that "he never refused to marry with her in fact their marriage has been refused by her parents". The parents of the deceased i.e. PW1 Mahipal Singh and PW5 Nirmala Devi stated that "they never refused marriage of Babita with Vikas Thakur and never raised any objection". In cross examination, PW1 stated that " it is further Contd..........
/38/ wrong to suggest that he never refused the proposal of marriage of Babita with accused Vikas Thakur and it is also wrong to suggest that they were no ready for the marriage of Babita with the accused i.e. why she committed suicide. PW5 Smt. Nirmala Devi in her examination in chief has clearly stated that " my daughter might have been committed suicide due to the fact that accused Vikas refused to marry with her and for this reason her B.P. was too low prior some days of her death". Further in the cross examination of PW5 she stated that " it is wrong to suggest that the father and the jeeja of accused had come to my house and I and my husband had refused to proposal of marriage ....... It is wrong to suggest that accused Vikas Thakur had never refused to marry my daughter and I and my husband was against the marriage ..... It is wrong to suggest that due to the fact that we were against the marriage of my daughter so my daughter had committed suicide". Hence it reveals from the evidence on record that parents of the deceased never refused to marry of deceased Babita with accused rather the parents of the accused were reluctant and accused could not materialized this issue with his parents.
Further , that the contention of Ld. Counsel for the accused that Contd..........
/39/ the incident was happened on 12.7.2005 and FIR was registered on 17.9.2005 and there was lot of delay in registration of the case. The delay in lodging the complaint or recording the statement of witnesses is normally looked down upon to each case as to considered on its own facts. It cannot be laid down as a rule of universal application that if there is any delay on the part of the prosecution, the case of the prosecution become suspect . It would depend upon several factors. The delay is plausible land acceptable and there is no reason to interfere with the conclusion. Similar view has been taken in a case titled as Acharaparambath Pradeepan 2006 (13) SCALE 600 and Banti @ Guddu 2004 Cri LJ 372 (SC).
Ld. Defence Counsel also pointed out several lacunas in the investigation and has submitted that the case of prosecution cannot be accepted as it is culmination of tainted investigation. It has been submitted that there are several lecunas in the investigation and the Investigation Officer failed to carry out the investigation on the expected lines. This contention of the defence counsel does not plausible since the investigation is the main component of the Criminal Justice systems. Fair investigation is the right of the accused and tainted investigation is bound to prejudice the accused. It is also a matter of common knowledge that investigating agency Contd..........
/40/ sometime fails to carry out the investigation as per norms. The investigation part in the Criminal Justice system requires lot of improvement. The Scientific investigation is also the need of the hour. In the present case also there are certain lacuna in the investigation but no further investigation was carried out in this regard. However, rejecting the case of the prosecution merely on the basis of defective investigation would amount to paying the premium for the faults of an Investigating Officer. It would also amount to playing into the hands of Investigation Officer. Reference can be made to Karnal Singh Vs. State of M.P. (1995) 5 SCC
518. In this case the apex court inter alia held as under:-
" Notwithstanding our unhappiness regarding the nature of investigation, we have to consider whether the evidence on record, even on strict scrutiny, establishes the guilt. In cases of defective investigation the Court has to be circumspect in evaluating the evidence but it would not be right in acquitting an accused solely on account of the defect; to do so would tantamount to playing into the hands of the Investigating Officer, if the investigation is designedly defective"
Contd..........
/41/ It has also been held time and again by the superior courts that in the case of defective investigation the case of the prosecution should be examined dehors such omissions otherwise the mischief done deliberately would be perpetuated and justice could be denied to the complainant party. Reference can be made to Ram Bihar Yadav Vs. State of Bihar (1994) 4 SCC.517. In Dhanaj Singh Vs. State of Punjab AIR 2004 SC 1920, the apex court dealt with plea of tainted investigation and inter alia held as under:-
" In the case of a defective investigation the Court has to be circumspect in evaluating the evidence. But it would not be right in acquitting an accused person solely on account of the defect; to do so would tantamount to playing into the hands of the Investigating Officer, if the investigation is designedly defective."
In Paras Yadav and others Vs. State of Bihar (1999 (2) SCC
126) it was held that " if the lapse or omission is committed by the investigating agency, the prosecutions evidence is required to be examined Contd..........
/42/ dehors such omissions to find out whether the said evidence is reliable or not. The contaminated conduct of officials should not stand on the way of evaluating the evidence by the Courts; otherwise the designed mischief would be perpetuated and justice could be denied to the complainant party."
It was also observed in Ram Bihari Yadav Vs. State of Bihar and others( 1998 (4) SCC 517) that " if primacy is given to such designed or negligent investigation, to the omission or lapses by perfunctory investigation or omissions, the faith and confidence of the people would be shaken not only in the law enforcing agency but also in the administration of justice"
In arriving at the conclusion about the guilt of the accused, the court has to judge the evidence by the yardstick of probabilities. The guilt or innocence of the accused has to be judged on the basis of evidence before the court and not on the basis that a vast number of people believe him to be guilty. The maxim falsus in uno falsus in omnibus i.e., false in one thing, false in every thing is neither a sound rule of law nor a rule of practice. So Contd..........
/43/ testimony of the prosecution witnesses which is found to be false in respect of one fact cannot be rejected outright as a whole, it can be accepted on cumulative evidence and other material on record as held in case titled as "Prithvi Nath Pandey Vs. State" 1994 Cr. L.J. 3623 (All.). Similarly, mere fact that the evidence of one witness was found unsafe for conviction is not per se a ground for rejecting the whole testimony of the prosecution because the maxim falsus in uno falsus in omnibus cannot be mechanically applied as held in case titled as "Nadodi Jayaraman Vs. State" AIR 1993 SC 777.
It is trite law, nevertheless fundamental that the attention of the accused must be drawn to every inculpatory material so as to enable him to explain it. The accused has also given opportunity to explain the evidentiary material brought on record as regard a particular circumstances proved against him. But the accused has not offered any plausible or reasonable explanation of such circumstances except to deny and shifted the burden upon the parents of the deceased which is not a proper explanation. In view of deposition made by prosecution witnesses it is not necessary that each and every error or omission would not necessarily result in vitiating a trial unless the errors goes to the root of the matter.
Contd..........
/44/ The assailant sailing in the two boats while in one hand contended that the parents of the accused has refused to marry their deceased daughter Babita with him. On the other hand stated that his parents are not agreeable for the marriage and he will try to convince them. The assailant has also admitted that all the letter placed on record except the latter mark A-14. The letter mark A-14 written by the deceased Babita is fabricated by the parents of the deceased to falsely implicate the accused in this case. This fact regarding genuineness of Mark A-14 is proved by the deposition of prosecution witnesses including PW2 Anjan Kumar Sen. The accused Vikas Thakur has made a mere denial that the letter mark A-14 does not pertaining to incident neither it is referred to him nor being made by the deceased Babita. However the addressee or addresser were being references made from the proceeding letter written by the accused from his own hand writing to the deceased Babita @ Bitto . Therefore, from the facts and circumstances and the ocular testimony of the prosecution witnesses it reveal that the accused Vikas Thakur instigated and created such a circumstances which resulted that the marriage of the deceased Babita could not be solemnized with him resulted which deceased was being under deep depression and committed suicide. The accused by his conduct direct and Contd..........
/45/ indirect treated the deceased so cruelly as to cause her to commit suicide. The conduct of the accused Vikas Thakur throughout revealed from the oral and documentary evidence to instigate, provoke, abetment , urge on encourage to the deceased Babita to commit suicide, therefore, held guilty for the offence u/s 306 IPC.
Therefore, in view of aforesaid discussion, facts and circumstances of the case revealed that the prosecution succeeded to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt against the accused Vikas Thakur. The testimony of the prosecution witnesses are reliable, trustworthy, corroborated and inspired confidence. Hence the accused Vikas Thakur S/o Chandra Pal Singh is hereby convicted for offence punishable u/s 306 IPC. ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON 11.09.2009 (SATINDER KUMAR GAUTAM) ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE(WEST-04) DELHI IN THE COURT OF SH. SATINDER KUMAR GAUTAM, ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE( WEST-04) , DELHI. SC NO. 132/1/2009 State Versus Vikas Thakur, S/o Chandra Pal Singh, R/o A-882/2, Shashtri Nagar, Delhi.
FIR No. 369/05 U/S: 306 IPC P.S. Sarai Rohilla ORDER ON SENTENCE:
Present: Sh. Zafar Khan, Additional Public Prosecutor for State.
Accused/Convicted Vikas Thakur in J/C with counsel Sh. Naveen Gaur, Advocate.
The accused/convicted has been convicted for offence punishable u/s 306 IPC vide separate detailed judgment dated 11.09.2009.
I have heard submission of Ld. APP for State and counsel for accused on the point of sentence and carefully gone through the material on record.
Ld. APP for State submitted that the convicted had played with the sentiments and emotions of the deceased Babita. He had been playing a fraud in the garb of love and not executed the promises. The deceased Contd..........
/2/ Babita had surrendered physically, mentally and emotionally and also ready to accept all terms and condition of the marriage with the convicted and his parent. Corresponding letters from the day beginning of love affairs have nurtured in the heart and soul of the love birds i.e. They have also taken a dream for their future. The convicted has not executed the promises of marriage and discourage the deceased resulted which she became depressed. The convicted Vikas Thakur avoiding her and reluctant to fulfill the promises of marriage. The prosecution have examined all the material witnesses to prove, each and every contents of allegation made against the convicted to bring home the guilt, within the four squares of the provision of 306 IPC. The victim is the deceased Babita and her parents. The system most opted solution would be restoration of the victim to the same position as she was not before wrong has been done, but this cannot be applied in the present scenario. The convicted should be punished by taking stern punishment to prevent the recurrence of the crime. Ld. APP has also relied upon a case titled as State of Punjab V. Gurmit Singh (1996) 2 SCC 384, regarding degrades the very soul of the helpless female.
It is further submitted that in the absence of any foolproof formula which may provide any basis for reasonable criteria to correctly assess various circumstances germane to the consideration of the gravity of Contd..........
/3/ crime, the discretionary judgment in the facts of each case cry for justice against the criminal. Justice demands the courts should impose punishment of befitting the crime so that the courts reflect public abhorrence of the crime. The court may also look upon the right of the victim of the crime and the society at large while considering the imposition of appropriate punishment. Therefore, the sentence to the convicted be awarded to the rigorous imprisonment as provided under the law.
Ld. Counsel for the convicted submitted that there was no malafide intention of any kind of the accused to instigate or encourage the deceased for taking such drastic steps. The convicted is an educated and law abiding citizens and has not involved in any kind of crime. He is only son in his family therefore prayed to take a lenient view and release the convicted on undergone imprisonment of 12 days which the convicted have been remained in J/C from the date of passing of the judgment till passing the order on sentence. Ld. Defence Counsel has also relied upon case titled as Sanjay Kumar Vs. State of Haryana (P&H) 2004(3) C.C. Cases (HC) 181 and Mohd. Hoshan A.P. And Anr. Vs. State of A.P 2002 (3) C.C. Cases (SC) 227.
Contd..........
/4/ In the instant case the convicted Vikas Thakur is found to be guilty of the offence punishable u/s 306 IPC for which the sentence is provided for either a term described which may be extend for 10 years and shall also liable for fine or with both. The fact that the offence took place in the year 2005 and accused was released on anticipatory bail. He has been facing trial since the date of filing of challan.
The efficiency and efficacy of the procedure in the Criminal Procedure Code, provided for under the existing procedure is guided by general terms such as ' circumstances of the crime' and ' mental state and age' inadequate sentence in a serious offence would do more harm to the justice system by undermining the public confidence in the efficacy of law. If the courts did not protect the victim, the victim would then resort to private vengeance as it has now started happening. It is therefore, the duty of every court to award proper sentence having regard to the nature of the offence and the manner in which it was executed or committed. For instance, every; crime has accompanying circumstances but which one qualifies as mitigating and which one acts as aggravating circumstance is something which is left for the trial court to decide.
Hon'ble Supreme Court quoted from the judgment of Dhananjoy Chatterjee V. State of West Bengal to thus support its view to uphold the Contd..........
/5/ judgment: " Imposition of appropriate punishment is the manner in which the courts respond to the society's cry for justice against the criminals. Justice demands that Courts should impose punishment befitting the crime so that the courts reflect public abhorrence of the crime. This judgment reflects the principles of deterrence and retribution.
After giving due consideration to the facts and circumstances of each case, for deciding just and appropriate sentence, the aggravating and mitigating factors and circumstances in which a crime has been committed are to be delicately balanced on the basis of really relevant circumstances in a dispassionate manner by the Court. In the absence of any foolproof formula which may provide any basis for reasonable criteria to correctly assess various circumstances germane to the consideration of t he gravity of crime, the discretionary judgment in the facts of each case is the only way in which such judgment may be equitably distinguished. The imposition of appropriate punishment is manner in which the court responds to the society's cry for justice against the criminal. The court must not only keep in view the right of the criminal but also the rights of the victim of the crime and the society at large while considering the imposition of appropriate punishment.
Contd..........
/6/ Justice Henery Alfred Mc Cardie succincity puts: " Trying a man is easy, as easy as falling off a log, compared with deciding what to do with him when he has been found guilty."
The facts and the given circumstances of the case and the nature of the crime and the manner in which it was committed, the motive for commission of the crime, the conduct of the convicted and the nature of modes operandi use, the indelible impact on the victim and his family and the social and economic circumstances of the convict and all other attending circumstances are relevant facts which would enter into the area of consideration.
In case titled as Praveen Malhotra Vs. State (Delhi) 1990(1) C.C Cases 299 (HC) it is held that " Sentiments or emotions have no part to play in judicial consideration and if allowed they are bound to cause miscarriage of justice.." In para No. 17 it is further observed that" The court cannot allow emotional and sentimental feelings to come into the judicial pronouncement. Once sentimental and emotional feelings are allowed to enter the judicial mind the judge is bound to view the evidence with a bias and in the case the conclusion may also be biased Contd..........
/7/ resulting in some cases in great injustice. The case have to be decided strictly on evidence change of innocent men being convicted have to be ruled out. There should be no hostile atmosphere against an accused in court. A hostile atmosphere is bound to interfere in an unbiased approach as well as a decision. This has to be avoided at all costs. ..."
Therefore, in view of the submission of Ld. APP and Ld. Counsel for the accused as well as the facts and circumstances of the case convicted Vikas Thakur S/o Chandra Pal Singh is sentenced for RI for 3 ½ years and fine of Rs. 20000/- , in default of payment of fine the convicted shall undergo SI for 3 months u/s 306 IPC. Benefit of section 428 Cr.P.C be awarded to accused.
A copy of this order as well as of judgment be given to accused free of cost.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON 22.9.2009 (SATINDER KUMAR GAUTAM) ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE(WEST-04) DELHI