Delhi District Court
42 vs Unknown on 22 May, 2012
1
IN THE COURT OF SH. GURDEEP SINGH
ADDITIONAL SESSION JUDGE-03
OUTER DISTRICT, ROHINI COURTS:DELHI
FIR No. : 873/05
PS : Mangolpuri
U/s : 306/34 IPC
Unique Case ID : 02404R0 440162006
In the matter of
The State
Versus
1. Gumani Lal s/o Sh. Suraj Bhan
R/o Vill. Bhindawas, P.S. Beri, PP Chhuchakwas
Distt. Jhajjar (Haryana)
2. Smt. Sheela W/o Late Sh. Anil & D/o Sh. Gumani Lal
R/o Vill. Bhindawas, P.S. Beri, PP Chhuchakwas
Distt. Jhajjar (Haryana)
3. Mahabir Singh S/o Sh. Gumani Lal
R/o Vill. Bhindawas, P.S. Beri, PP Chhuchakwas
Distt. Jhajjar (Haryana)
4. Jai Bhagwan S/o Sh. Gumani Lal
R/o Vill. Bhindawas, P.S. Beri, PP Chhuchakwas
Distt. Jhajjar (Haryana)
5. Krishna CAW/Cell
S.P. Office
Jhajjar (Haryana)
...ACCUSED
Session Case No. : 113/08
Date of Institution : 29.03.2006
Date of Committal : 25.04.2006
Date of reserving judgment/order : 22.05.2012
Date of pronouncement : 22.05.2012
J U D G M E N T
1. The accused Gumani Lal was sent up to stand trial by police of PS FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 1 of 44 2 Mangolpuri for offence punishable u/s 306 IPC. Subsequently accused Sheela, Mahabir Singh, Jai Bhagwan and Krishna were also sent up to stand trial by way of supplementary charge sheet for the same offence.
2. The prosecution case in brief is that on 02.12.2005 ASI Dharambir Singh reached at Jaipur Golden Hospital for enquiry regarding DD No.3 A where he came to know that Anil Kumar 1476/North-West, who was admitted in the hospital, had expired. In the meantime two more DD entries were received from Ct. Rafiq, and Ct. Vijay Kumar also met in the hospital and Smt. Premwati was present and her statement was recorded. She stated that she has two children, one son Anil Kumar i.e. deceased and one daughter Sarita Yadav and her son Anil Kumar was posted at PS Mangolpuri, North-West District as constable. He was married at Village Libaspur with Poonam daughter of late Daya Singh, who however expired in the year 2001 on account of illness and she had a daughter aged about 9 ½ years who studying in New Estate Academy. She married her son Anil Kumar in the year 2003 with Sheela d/o Sh. Gumani Lal, who remained alright for two years and gave birth to one child and thereafter she started misbehaving with them and used to abuse her and sometime used to call her brother and threatened them. They were bearing the same as it was second marriage of Anil and expecting that it would be gradually alright but she continued to abuse them. She further stated that she (accused Sheela) used to misbehave with grand daughter Srishti even before giving birth to a baby and once she tried to kill her by burning. Anil used to counsel her but FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 2 of 44 3 accused Sheela used to take advantage of Anil being in the government servant and it was second marriage and she used to tell him to leave her mother and sister and left Shristi at orphanage and they would live together and she was asking for his full salary and she was also demanding Rs.2 lacs which was withdrawn from the account of Sarita and was asking to deposit the same in her name and otherwise Anil would spend the same on her marriage. Anil tried to make her understand but she did not accede and left for her parental home and filed a complaint at Women Cell in Jhajjar regarding dowry.
3. She further stated that on 23.10.2005, accused Sheela, her father Gumani Lal and brother Mahabir came to their house and three four persons from Village Jaffarpur wherein elder sister and Bua of Sheela were also residing, came there alongwith three four persons and started threatening them and accused Gumani Lal and Bua of Sheela Chandro held Anil from his neck and grappled with him. In the meantime, PCR also came. ASI Brahm Prakash from PS Jaffarpur came and counselled them and got the matter compromised. When Anil was coming from duty, she also came to know that sister of Sheela, brother-in-law (jija), Bua and father were taken her back and when Anil returned to the house Jija of Sheela taken her on the motorcycle and remaining persons started beating Anil and her father threatened them that he would get all the family members arrested and in respect of the same Anil had made complaint to PS Jaffarpur on 24.10.2005.
4. Thereafter Sarita who was living in the hostel of Lady Harding FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 3 of 44 4 College and was doing M.B.B.S. had received threatening call. She also made complaint at PS Mandir Marg in this regard on 16.11.2005. She further stated that thereafter he received summon for appearing on 25.11.2005 before S.P. Office Mahila Cell, District Jhajjar. Accordingly, on 25.11.2005, Anil alongwith his brother-in-law (sala) and uncle Bharat Singh reached at Jhajjar but Sheela did not appear and they were asked to appear on 01.12.2005. On this date, Anil, his brother-in-law Lal Singh of Libaspur, Captain Bharat Singh also went to Jhajjar Mahila Cell where Sheela, father Gumani Lal, chacha Jai Bhagwan alongwith 8/9 persons of their village were present and they appeared before IO Women Cell. She stated that Lal Singh told her that IO Women Cell Jhajjar slapped Anil in presence of Sheela and her family member without making any enquiry and also gave beating with scale and when Anil told IO that he is also working in police and should not to be beaten like this, IO threatened that she would get him removed from the service and she would lodge him in the lock-up and beat her after making her naked and asked him to take Sheela alongwith her and thereafter they appeared before S.P. Jhajjar and told about the incident but he did not take any action and only enquired from his reader as to why IO is doing like this. Thereafter they returned. She stated that Lal Singh also told her that Anil remained with him till 11:00 p.m. and thereafter he left Anil at the gate of Subh Enclave. She further stated that her son has committed suicide on account of harassment caused by Sheela and her family members and further on account of insult and beatings at Women Cell Jhajjar. On the FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 4 of 44 5 basis of the statement, an FIR u/s 306 IPC was registered.
5. The spot was inspected. One suicide note which was in the name of Commissioner of Police and some other documents were taken into police possession. Black powder Sulfas lying scattered was taken into possession. The postmortem upon the dead body was got conducted. Viscera was preserved. The doctor gave opinion that cause of death is pending till receiving the chemical analysis of viscera. As per the chemical analysis, the viscera was found containing aluminum phosphide. Accused Gumani Lal was arrested. After completion of the investigation, initially accused Gumani Lal was sent for offence punishable u/s 306 IPC and later on remaining accused persons also formally arrested and were also charge sheeted for same offence.
6. After supplying the necessary copies, the case was committed to the court of session vide order dated 25.04.2006 by Ld. MM.
7. My Ld. Predecessor vide order dt. 5.5.2007, after finding prime-facie case, charged accused Gumani Lal for offence punishable 306 IPC to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Subsequently accused Sheela, Mahabir, Jai Bhagwan and Krishan were also charged for same offence vide order dated 16.02.2008, to which they also pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
8. Vide order dated 16.02.2008, the supplementary charge sheet was also clubbed with the main charge sheet.
9. The prosecution in support of their case examined as many as FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 5 of 44 6 20 witnesses.
10. The prosecution examined following material witnesses :
i) PW-2 Premwati, complainant mother of deceased Anil Kumar, proved her statement made to police as Ex.PW-2/A, original bill of telephone as Ex.PW-2/B.
ii) PW-7 Sh. Chander Hass brother-in-law of deceased from the earlier marriage. He proved his statement recorded by the police as Ex.PW-7/A and dead body identification statement as Ex.PW-7/B. He is also witness of seizure of suicide note and documents from the house of deceased and black powder (sulphas) and proved the seizure memo Ex.PW-7/C and Ex.PW-7/D respectively.
iii) PW-8 Sh. Lal Singh, also brother-in-law of deceased from the earlier marriage. He is witness of incident taken place at Women Cell.
iv) PW-9 Dr. Sarita Yadav, sister of deceased Anil.
v) PW-10 Retd. Capt. Bharat Singh is an independent witness of the incident took place at Mahila Cell, Jhajjar. He, however, turned hostile towards the prosecution and did not support the prosecution at all despite his cross-examination at length.
vi) PW-11 Sh. Amit Yadav cousin brother of deceased.
11. The prosecution also examined following formal witnesses :-
i) PW-1 SI Madan Lal is the duty officer who recorded FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 6 of 44 7 formal FIR on the basis of rukka and proved the copy of FIR as Ex.PW-1/A and his endorsement as Ex.PW-1/B.
ii) PW-3 HC Satish Kumar, the DD Writer, who on the basis of information received from Ct. Naresh and Dr. Tarsem Goel from Jaipur Golden Hospital that Anil Kumar had expired in the hospital, recorded DD No.26 and DD No. 29 respectively and proved the said DDs as Ex.PW-3/A and Ex.PW-3/B respectively. He also proved the DD entry of arrival of ASI Krishan Singh as Ex.PW-3/C.
iii) PW-5 Sh. Raj Kumar, Asst. Nodal Officer, Reliance Communication proved the record of mobile phone No. 9311399939 which is in the name of Anil Kumar Yadav (deceased) and proved the application form as Ex.PW-5/A, call details as Ex.PW-5/B and certificate u/s 65 B of Evidence Act as Ex.PW-5/C.
iv) PW-6 Dr. Manoj Dhingra, the doctor who conducted postmortem upon the dead body of deceased and observed abrasion ½ x ½ cm on right leg, abrasion ½ cm on right elbow with soft scab, one stitch on the left shoulder with injection mark and abrasion 1 cm x 1 cm on scalp region and after report of Viscra opined cause of death due to phosphide poisoning and proved detailed postmortem report as Ex.PW-6/A.
v) PW-12 Dr. Pradeep Dua proved the MLC of Anil Kumar as Ex.PW-12/A prepared by Dr. Rohit and FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 7 of 44 8 death summary as Ex.PW-12/B prepared by Dr. Rahul.
vi) PW-15 Ct. Prashan Singh deposited the exhibits in sealed condition vide RC No. 685/05 at FSL Rohini.
vii) PW-18 HC Durgesh Kumar, the MHC(M) with whom the case properties were deposited and who got deposited the same at FSL Rohini for examination and proved the relevant entries as Ex.PW-18/A, Ex.PW-18/B, copy of RC as Ex.PW-18/C.
12. The prosecution also examined following witnesses of arrest and investigation :-
i) PW-4 Ct. Dalbir Singh is the witness of arrest of accused Gumani Lal and proved his arrest memo and personal search memo as Ex.PW-4/A and Ex.PW-4/B respectively.
ii) PW-13 Ct. Vijay Kumar who recorded information of police post regarding admission of Anil Kumar in the Jaipur Golden Hospital after consuming sulfas and proved the DD as Ex.PW-13/A. He also joined the investigation and witness of seizure of gastric lavage handed over by doctor and seizure of sulfas, suicide note and documents from the place of incident and proved the seizure memo of gastric lavage as Ex.PW-13/B, seizure of suicide notes and some documents as Ex.PW-7/C, seizure of sulfas powder as Ex.PW-7/D. He also proved suicide note as Ex.PW-13/C, photocopy of ITALANAMA as FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 8 of 44 9 Ex.PW-13/D, carbon copy of notice u/s 160 Cr.PC as Ex.PW-13/E, photocopy of application of casual leave of Ct. Anil as Ex.PW-13/F, one carbon coy of complaint addressed to SHO PS Jaffarpur as Ex.PW-13/G, one application of information regarding family dispute made to DCP North West Ashok Vihar made by Anil Kumar as Ex.PW-13/H and seizure memo of viscera box as Ex.PW-13/I.
iii) PW-14 Ct. Shobh Nath, witness joined the investigation and on the receipt of DD No.3, alongwith ASI Krishan Singh reached at Jaipur Golden Hospital where Anil Kumar was found admitted and he was unfit for statement.
iv) PW-16 ASI Brahm Prakash is the IO of the complaint regarding quarrel between deceased and accused Sheela and her family members earlier to the occurrence and of the complaint filed by Anil against accused Anil and his family members regarding harassment. He proved the copy of DD No.13 A as Ex.PW-16/A and DD No. 14 A as Ex.PW-16/B, copy of DD No.35-B as Ex.PW-16/C.
v) PW-17 ASI Kishan Singh is the first IO who initially reached at the spot on the receipt of the information and witness of seizure of gastric lavage.
vi) PW-19 Inspector Dharambir Singh Tomar, who was the subsequent IO who got the FIR registered, and witness of seizure of suicide note alongwith some FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 9 of 44 10 other documents and black powder sulfas from the place of occurrence, got the postmortem conducted, seizure of gastric lavage, arrest of accused Gumani Lal. He in addition to other memos proved rukka as Ex.PW-19/A, site plan as Ex.PW-19/B, dead body identification statement of Hari Kishan as Ex.PW-19/D, receipt of handing over of dead body as Ex.PW-19/E, FSL report as Ex.PW-19/F.
vii) PW-20 SI Badami Lal, is also IO and witness of formal arrest of remaining accused persons who were on anticipatory bail from hon'ble High Court and proved arrest memo of accused persons namely Sheela Devi, Mahabir Singh, Jai Bhagwan and Krishna Devi as Ex.PW-20/A, Ex.PW-20/B, Ex.PW-20/C and Ex.PW-20/D respectively and sanction u/s 197 Cr.PC as Ex.PW-20/E.
13. Statements of accused persons were recorded recorded U/s 313 Cr. PC wherein they denied the prosecution evidence and claimed innocent.
14. Accused Gumani Lal admitted in his statement that his daughter was married with Anil and child was born from the wed-lock and rest evidence he denied. He also admitted that his daughter had filed complaint at Mahila Cell, Jhajjar. He also admitted that Poonam was earlier married to deceased. He stated that this a false case and he is innocent and falsely implicated in this case. However, he chose not to lead evidence in his defence.
FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 10 of 44 1115. Similarly, accused Sheela also admitted her marriage with deceased but stated that she does not know about the reason of death of Poonam first wife of deceased. She also admitted that she had lodged complaint at Mahila Cell, Jhajjar but she does not know whether Chander Hass and Anil went to Jhajjar to attend the proceedings alongwith one Bharat Singh. She stated that she had attended the CAW Cell on 25.11.2005 and on that day neither Anil had attended the same nor his relative attended the same. IO Bimla had told them that she will give them the call for the next date. She also admits that she had made complaint to the police that Anil and his mother was not allowing her to enter in the house and the police had come on his complaint and counseled him, however, Anil did not take her to his house. She stated that documents are subsequently planted. She stated that she is innocent and falsely implicated in this case and Anil and his mother used to harass her for dowry demand. She further stated the mother of Anil had expired and his father had married with PW Prem Wati and thereafter he also expired and there was dispute amongst PW Prem Wati and deceased Anil regarding property and hence he was living in Subh Enclave. They were harassing her and had turned out of the house saying that she is mentally upset and were not allowing her to stay in the matrimonial home, for which she had made the complaint at CAW Cell, Jhajjar against Prem Wati, Sarita Yadav, Anil, Satpal, Daya Kishan and Suresh. The case was being investigated and therefore out of the vengeance (sic) they had falsely implicated her and her family members in this false case and Anil committed FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 11 of 44 12 suicide on account of dispute with his step mother. She also chose not to lead evidence in her defence.
16. Accused Mahabir Singh denied the prosecution evidence and stated that he never visited the Women Cell, Jhajjar and has no concerned about this case because he is living separately from his parents. He has never attended any panchayat or proceedings in respect of Sheela at Mahila Cell, Jhajjhar Haryana. However, he also chose not to lead evidence in his defence.
17. Accused Jai Bhagwan also denied the prosecution evidence and stated that he is innocent. He also chose not to lead evidence in his defence.
18. Accused Krishna Devi also denied the prosecution evidence and stated that she has no relation or concern with accused Sheela and her family members. She stated that she was neither IO nor she attended the complaint at Mahila Cell Jhajjar and was only handling the case pertaining to the jurisdiction of Bahadurgarh regarding Mahila Cell, as per order of S.P. and the complaint was in respect of jurisdiction of Jhajjar which was handled by (SI) Bimla. She has no concern with the cases pertaining to jurisdiction of Jhajjar, which was being handled by different IO. She had never met with Anil or co-accused in connection with her duties. The sanction was given by SSP without applying his mind and without verifying the correct facts. She stated that she would lead evidence in her defence and examined DW-1 ASI Shri Niwas who proved the order of SP regarding jurisdiction.
FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 12 of 44 1319. I have heard Sh. A. K. Srivastava, Ld. Addl. PP for State and Sh.
Rajpal Singh, Advocate for accused Krishna and Sh. Inayat Ahmed, Advocate for remaining accused persons. I have also gone through the record.
20. PW-2 Prem Wati, mother of deceased Anil Kumar, testified that Anil was married with Poonam and from the wedlock of Anil and Poonam, one daughter Sharisti was born and in the year of 2001, Poonam expired due to illness. On 27.02.2004, her son Anil was again married with accused Sheela and for about two years, after the marriage, behaviour of accused Sheela was normal. On 15.02.2005, baby boy Ashutosh was born to Anil and accused Sheela. Thereafter, when his grand son Ashutosh was about two months old, accused Sheela started harassing her son Anil and she was pressurizing him to stay separately from her and her daughter Sarita Yadav. Accused Sheela was also harassing her grand daughter Sharisti, as she never allowed her to take food and also on one occasion accused Sheela tried to burn her grand daughter Sharisti. Anil tried his best to make her understand, but accused Sheela used to behave stupidly. She also used to pressurize Anil to leave Sharisti in anathalya and also leave her and her daughter Sarita Yadav. She also used to pressurize Anil to transfer the amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- (two lacs) from the account of Sarita to her own account. Deceased Anil tried to pacify her, but she had not mend her behaviour and went to her parents house along with her grand son Ashutosh.
21. She further stated that on 23.09.2005, she was away to her job and FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 13 of 44 14 Anil was also away to his job. Her daughter Sarita Yadav and grand daughter Sharisti were away to their educational institutes and their house was locked. Accused Gumani Lal and Sheela came to their house and after breaking the lock, they entered the house. At about 3:00 p.m, when Anil came to the house, accused Gumani Lal and Sheela misbehaved with him and Gumani Lal gave a beating to Anil. At about 3:15 p.m, when she reached at her house, accused Gumani Lal, was beating her son Anil. Buwa of Sheela, namely, Chandro Devi also came there and also gave a threat and beating to Anil and they also made a call at 100 number. The PCR officials and later on local police of Jafar Pur also reached there. One ASI Bhram Prakash tried to pacify the matter and he pacified Gumani Lal and Sheela. Thereafter, police officials left from there. Thereafter, when (sic) Anil again was going to duty, accused Krishna Devi (It is wrongly written as "accused Krishna Devi" since as per the prosecution case itself, accused Krishna Devi had not come to their house and it is some other Krishna and wrongly word 'accused' is written in front of her name), Jija of Sheela namely Jagbir, Buwa Chandro Devi and Gumani Lal and Sheela met him on the way along with 2-3 other persons and all the above named persons gave beatings to her son Anil and they left and also took away Sheela with them on the motorcycle. They had also threatened to kill them.
22. She further stated that on 24.10.2005, Anil lodged a complaint at Jafar Pur.
23. She further stated that her daughter Sarita Yadav was studying in FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 14 of 44 15 Lady Harding College, as she was doing MBBS. Accused Mahabir, gave a threatening call to her daughter and she lodged a complaint at PS.
24. She also stated that accused Sheela also lodged a complaint at CAW Cell, Jhajjar. Her son Anil and Chander Hass went to Jhajjar to attend the proceedings of CAW Cell at Jhajjar along with one Bharat Singh, who was friend of her husband. During the proceedings on 25.11.2005 at Jhajjar, Sheela had not appeared and therefore, the matter was adjourned for 01.12.2005. On 01.12.2005, her son Anil, his brother-in-law Lal Singh and Captain Bharat Singh again went to CAW Cell, Jhajjar. Accused Gumani Lal, Jai Bhagwan, Sheela and other persons also reached there and when her son Anil came down from the motorcycle, the I.O of the case, namely, Krishna gave beatings to her son Anil with danda and fist blows and when her son told her that he is also in the police and the I.O should not behave like this then the I.O told him that either he should take Sheela with him otherwise she will get him dismissed from the services of Delhi Police and put him in jail and will beat him after making him naked. Thereafter, her son and other persons accompanying him, made complaint (sic) to the senior officers about the behaviour of Krishna, but nothing was done by the senior officers.
25. She stated thereafter, her son along with Lal Singh and Bharat Singh came back and Lal Singh left Anil at the gate of Subh Enclave at about 11:00 p.m. Anil also made a call to her at 12:35 a.m. (mid night) and told her that he had consumed sulfas and was FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 15 of 44 16 committing suicide, as he had been beaten by I.O Krishna at the instance/complaint of Sheela and he is committing suicide due to the harassment and humiliation meted out to him by accused Sheela, Gumani Lal, Mahabir and Jai Bhagwan. She stated that then she made a call to Chander Hass and thereafter to Amit, her relative, who went to Subh Enclave, where her son Anil was lying and he shifted him to Jaipur Golden Hospital. In the early morning, she went to the hospital, her son Anil was in the ICU and expired at about 12:00-12:30 p.m in the hospital
26. PW-7 Sh. Chander Hass corroborated PW-2 regarding his sister Poonam was married with Anil Kumar (deceased) who expired in the year 2001 and one female child, namely, Shrishti was born from the wedlock. After the death of his sister, their relations with Anil Kumar were very cordial. His niece (sic) Shrishti was also residing with Anil and his family. The grand mother of Shrishti was also residing along with Sarita (sister of Anil) in the same house.
27. He further stated that in the year of 2003, Anil Kumar married with accused Sheela and one male child was also born from this wedlock. For about one year, the relation between Anil and Sheela remained normal, but thereafter Sheela started creating problems for Anil and his family. Sheela was pressurizing Anil to leave Shrishti in anathalya and also get rid off his mother Prem Wati and sister Sarita. Due to this problem, Shristhi was sent to hostel. After sometime, again Shrishti was got admitted in New State Academy Pitampura and Anil rented out an accommodation FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 16 of 44 17 near the academy, where he was staying with his daughter. During that period, mother and sister of Anil were residing at his parental house in village. Accused Sheela had left deceased Anil and went to her parental house along with her son. She lodged complaint against deceased Anil before CAW Cell, Jhajjar, Haryana. In the month of November, 2005, he also accompanied Anil to a proceedings before CAW Cell, Jhajjar. During that proceedings, Sheela had not attended the cell. Although, her father and other relatives were present. At that time, accused Gumani Lal and his relatives had threatened Anil that they would get him suspended from the job, if he would not take Sheela with him. There was little commotion also and the matter was adjourned.
28. He further stated that on 01.12.2005, again Anil went to CAW Cell, Jhajjar along with his cousin Lal Singh and Captain Bharat Singh. It was told to him by his brother Lal Singh that I.O of the case, namely, ASI Krishna had given beatings. On the same night, he received a telephonic call from Prem Wati. Although he could not attend that call and thereafter, he himself called back her and she told him that Anil had consumed something and is serious. She instructed him to visit Subh Enclave, where Anil was residing with his daughter. He immediately reached there alongwith his cousin Lal Singh. Anil was lying in semi conscious condition in the house. They immediately shifted him to Jaipur Golden Hospital and he was shifted to ICU. Later on, in the evening i.e. 02.12.2005, he expired in the hospital. Police was called. Police also recorded his statement. He stated that Anil was tortured and FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 17 of 44 18 harassed by accused Sheela, his father Gumani Lal and other members and the ordeal, which happened with him on 01.12.2005, at CAW Cell Jhajjar, are responsible for his suicide.
29. He further stated that the police also searched the house at Subh Enclave. One suicide note and other documents were recovered from the house and the same were seized by the police officials. The documents were pertaining to the proceedings at CAW Cell, Jhajjar. The black powder seems to be sulfas was also recovered from the room at F61, Subh Enclave which was also seized.
30. There are three important fact alleged in the present case. One is with respect to harassment on the part of Sheela and her family members, second is regarding beatings given at the Women Cell Jhajjar and third is in connection with recovery effected from the place of occurrence including suicide note.
31. PW-8 Sh. Lal Singh also corroborated other witnesses regarding marriage of his sister Poonam with deceased, expired in the year 2001, and then his brother-in-law was married with Sheela and whenever he met him he told regarding family dispute with Sheela. He stated that Anil once told him that his wife Sheela had filed a complaint in Women Cell at Jhajjar and in this regard on 01.12.2005, he alongwith Anil went to S.P. Office Jhajjar, Haryana and uncle of Anil namely Bharat Singh also met them. In the said office, Sheela, her father Gumani Lal, uncle Jai Bhagwan and brother Mahabir and some other villagers who came alongwith them met them in the said office. When they reached in Mahila Cell, IO who was dealing with the said complaint of FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 18 of 44 19 Sheela namely Krishna met and she inquired, who is Anil among them, on which Anil gave his introduction as Anil and thereafter IO Krishna (accused) came towards Anil and gave beatings with steel scale and Gumani Lal, Jai Bhagwan, Mahavir and Sheela and other persons who accompanied them mentioned above were also present there...
32. PW-9 Dr. Sarita Yadav, step sister of deceased, similarly corroborated other witnesses. She stated that relation between Sheela and Anil remained cordial for about 1 ½ year, and thereafter, behaviour of Sheela was changed. Accused Sheela wanted to get the FDR amount transferred in her name which existed in her (witness) name and, she also wanted to give his all salary to her (accused) and did not used to take care of his mother, Shrishti and herself. The amount of Rs.2 lacs which belonged to her (witness) was desired by Sheela to be transferred in her name. His brother Anil refused to transfer this money to Sheela, on which, accused Sheela quarreled with him. The behaviour of accused Sheela was not well towards Shrishti, particularly after the birth of male child from the wedlock of Anil and Sheela. In July/August 2005, accused Sheela left the house of Anil, after quarreling with him.
33. She stated that after 2-3 days of leaving the house of his brother Anil, Mahavir (brother of Sheela) made a telephonic call on their land-line phone. He threatened them and told that, he had relations with bad elements of Mitraun and Dichaun, and they will be lifted by those bad elements and threatened them to kill. After FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 19 of 44 20 this incident, she shifted to the Hostel of his college. Still, threatening calls were made by accused Mahabir on my mobile phone, when she stayed at her Hostel. She had also lodged a complaint in the PS Mandir Marg. The investigation was made in this respect and from the Mobile Phone Call details, it was revealed that the call was made from Village Chuchak Vas, the said village is adjacent to the village of accused Sheela, namely Bhindavas.
34. PW-2 in respect of harassment claims to be witness that when she arrived at about 3:15 p.m at her house, accused Gumani Lal, was beating her son Anil. Buwa of Sheela, namely, Chandro Devi also came there and also gave a threat and beating to Anil and police came and matter was pacified and while Anil again was going to duty, Krishna Devi, Jija of Sheela namely Jagbir, Buwa Chandro Devi and Gumani Lal and Sheela met him on the way along with 2-3 other persons and all the above named persons gave beatings to her son Anil. Therefore she is not witness of this incident and whatever she stating is only hearsay.
35. She claims that Anil has made complaint on 24.10.2005 at PS Jafarpur. The prosecution has examined PW-16 ASI Brahm Prakash who had attended the said call. He testified that on 23.10.2005 he was posted as Asst. Sub-Inspector at PS Jafarpur Kalan and was on emergency duty and on the receipt of DD No. 13 A regarding quarrel at Khera Dabar Bus Stand, he reached at the spot and met one Sheela w/o Anil alongwith a child with her mother-in-law and her husband. She made complaint to him that FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 20 of 44 21 she had come to live at her matrimonial home but they are not permitting her to come inside the house. She counseled Anil. On this he (deceased) agreed and taken her to home. Sheela, however, stated that she does not want any legal action against them. He recorded the arrival entry in respect of the same at the police station.
36. He further testified that on 24.10.2005, Anil who was resident of Khera Dabar and was employed at Delhi Police came to the police station and gave a complaint regarding his harassment from his wife and in-laws side and to implicate in a case of dowry, the said complaint Ex.PW-13/G was marked to him vide DD No. 35-B dated 24.10.2005. After receiving the said complaint, he visited the house of Anil after four/five days, where he found the house locked and from the neighbours, he came to know that his wife had gone to her parental house and Anil had gone to his duty. After about 10 days, he again visited the house of Anil where again the said house was found locked. He had talked with Anil on phone, on which he told that it is a family matter and if required then he will call. Thereafter he filed the said complaint without any action.
37. In his cross-examination on behalf of Krishna he admitted that he does not know as to who had recorded and given the said complaint Ex.PW-13/G to duty officer and now he does not have any copy of said complaint.
38. In his cross-examination on behalf of remaining accused persons, he stated that after receiving the complaint, he tried to contact FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 21 of 44 22 Anil, but he (deceased) did not meet him (witness) personally on any occasion thereafter, nor he (deceased) contacted him (witness) regarding this complaint. He admitted that Anil did not meet him even after his telephonic call in connection of the above said complaint. He also admitted that on 23.10.2005, when Anil and his mother met him at bus stand Khera Daba, they did not disclose anything regarding the beatings given to Shristi daughter of deceased Anil by accused Sheela. He also admitted that even this fact did not come into his knowledge during the inquiry of the said complaint.
39. Therefore the statement to the effect that Sheela, Gumani Lal, Bua Chandro Devi and many other persons were present and call was made to the police and local police came there is incorrect. As per local police only Sheela and her child was with her and husband and his mother was also there and there was no other person and Sheela also stated that she does not want to take any legal action and Anil had taken her to home. The written complaint was given on 24.10.2005 but he did not respond to the IO and stated to the IO that it is family matter. Meaning thereby he was not serious about the complaint. Therefore only this fact can be proved that Sheela had come to the matrimonial home alongwith her child and quarrel took place. As regard other accused Gumani Lal, there is no evidence. Further Premwati has made significant improvement. She has also made improvement regarding breaking open the lock.
40. In his cross-examination, PW-7 admitted that he used to visit the FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 22 of 44 23 house of Anil i.e the matrimonial house of his sister very often. He does not know, the property details of Anil. He do not know, whether Anil was having a land at Khera Dabar, measuring 1½ kilas. He does not know whether the said land was in the name of Anil and whether Anil was having a plot of measuring one Kanal at Khera Dabar. He further admitted that deceased Anil was having a step mother, named Prem Wati. He does not know, whether there was any quarrel between Prem Wati and Anil, with regard to the above property. He does not know, whether on the night of 01.12.2005, Prem Wati had a quarrel with Anil on the telephone.
41. He was confronted with the portion of his statement that Anil was harassed by accused Sheela and his father Gumani Lal and they were responsible for the suicide of Anil where it is not recorded in the aforesaid manner. He was also confronted that on 01.12.2005, Prem Wati had made a call to me, which I could not take and thereafter I returned the call to the Prem Wati. This witness is brother of deceased wife of deceased Anil and claims that they had cordial relation. But strangely denies the knowledge regarding property owned by Anil. He also denies the knowledge regarding quarrel between Premwati and Anil regarding property. If he was close to their family, he would have either denied the suggestion or admitted the same. But feigning ignorance about the same and ignorance about feigning the fact that Premwati had quarreled with Anil on the fateful day, shows that he is trying to conceal important fact. He has also made significant improvement regarding receiving the call after the deceased has consumed FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 23 of 44 24 sulfas.
42. PW-8 Sh. Lal Singh had generally stated that he used to tell him that he had family dispute with Sheela, his wife which is general statement and nothing can be concluded from the same that the deceased was harassed by Sheela.
43. PW-9 Dr. Sarita is step sister of deceased. She was M.B.B.S. student at relevant time with Lady Harding Medical College. She stated relation between Anil and Sheela remained cordial for one and half years and thereafter her behaviour changed and from the wedlock of Anil and Poona one female child was born. Accused Sheela wanted to get the FDR amount transfered in her name which existed in her name and she also wanted his full salary and did not used to take care of his mother, Srishti and herself. The amount of Rs.2 lacs which belonged to her was desired by Sheela to be transfered in her name. His brother Anil refused the same and on which she quarreled with him. She also claims threatening call was received from Mahabir and claims to have filed complaint regarding threatening call. She herself disclosed that investigation was made and call was found to be made from Chuchak Vas which was adjacent to village of Sheela. However, admittedly the said call could not be linked to Sheela or her other family members. In her cross-examination, she stated that deceased was her step brother. She does not know when the first FDR was purchased by her mother in his name, after the death of her father but she came to know about the same when she became 18 years old. Her brother, Anil was shifted to Shubh Enclave, FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 24 of 44 25 Pitampura in July 2005. She had also visited the said house many times. She had never seen accused Sheela in Subh Enclave. His brother shifted to Subh Enclave in a separate residence due to ill- treatment of accused Sheela with Shrishti, daughter of Anil and Poonam. She admits that prior to July, 2005, brother Anil used to reside at their house in Delhi at Khera Dabar. From July 2005, Shrishti used to reside with her brother at Subh Enclave and prior to this during Summer Vacation, Shrishti lived with Chander Hass for some period.
44. She stated as regard complaint given to SHO, PS-Mandir Marg, no arrest was made on the same and no FIR was lodged on that complaint. She also does not know what action was taken on the said complaint. She admitted that she was studying MBBS in the year 2005 and she was also staying in the Hostel at that time. On 25.11.2005, also she was at her house as the classes were suspended due to preparation for examination. The examination schedule were from 1.12.2005 to 14/15.12.2005. On 01.12.2005, in the night when phone call was received by her mother of her brother, she was present with her. She heard the talks by her own ears which were told by her mother, but the talks which were made from my brother to my mother was narrated by her mother to her. She had not even visited the hospital on the next day. She does not remember the flat number at Subh Enclave and again said there was no number given to the said flat at that time. She had joined M.B.B.S. Course in the September, 2001 and stayed in the hostel for some period, three times, but she does not remember exactly the period of stay at hostel. The witness claims that she FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 25 of 44 26 has gone to the hostel on account of threat received from family members of Sheela and also made complaint to the Police. She was third year student when the alleged incident took place and she was present in the house. Yet despite hearing conversation between her mother and brother, and knowing that he has consumed sulfas, she has not visited the hospital immediately or even did not visit the hospital on the next day. This is quite unnatural for a witness who claims that deceased was her brother and she had cordial relation. She was knowing medical science despite that she has chosen not to visit her brother who died in the hospital. The witness also does not know as to when FDR was purchased which allegedly Sheela was pressurising to be transfered in her name. She has, however, nowhere stated that behaviour of Sheela was bad towards them. Although, she has stated that Sheela used to say his brother to not take care of her and her mother. But this to my mind are daily wear and tear of family life and does not amount to harassment.
45. Next is fact with respect to the Mahila Cell Jhajjar. PW-2 mother of deceased Anil as admittedly not the witness of what happened at Mahila Cell Jhajjar. She, however, stated that Sheela had lodged complaint and her son Anil and Chander Hass went to attend the proceedings with one Bharat Singh friend of her husband. She although was called at Women Cell Jhajjar but she did not visit herself.
46. PW-9 Dr. Sarita is also not witness as to what happened at Women Cell Jhajjar, although she was also summoned at Women FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 26 of 44 27 Cell Jhajjar but did not attend.
47. PW-7 Sh. Chander Hass is witness who visited Women Cell Jhajjar with deceased Anil on one occasion i.e. on 25.11.2005. He stated that in the month of November, 2005, he also accompanied Anil to a proceedings before CAW Cell, Jhajjar. During that proceedings, Sheela had not attended the cell. Although, her father and other relatives were present. At that time, accused Gumani Lal and his relatives had threatened Anil that they would get him suspended from the job, if he would not take Sheela with him. There was little commotion also and the matter was adjourned. On 01.12.2005, again Anil went to CAW Cell, Jhajjar along with his cousin Lal Singh and Captain Bharat Singh. Therefore this witness has not attended the said hearing. Therefore his testimony with respect to as to what happened on 01.12.2005, at Women Cell Jhajjar is hearsay.
48. PW-8 Lal Singh testified that on 01.12.2005, he alongwith Anil went to S.P. Office Jhajjar, Haryana and uncle of Anil namely Bharat Singh also met them. In the said office, Sheela, her father Gumani Lal, uncle Jai Bhagwan and brother Mahabir and some other villagers who came alongwith them met them in the said office. When they reached in Mahila Cell, IO who was dealing with the said complaint of Sheela namely Krishna met and she inquired, who is Anil among them, on which Anil gave his introduction as Anil and thereafter IO Krishna (accused) came towards Anil and gave beatings with steel scale and Gumani Lal, Jai Bhagwan, Mahavir and Sheela and other persons who FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 27 of 44 28 accompanied them mentioned above were also present there. When accused Krishna gave beatings to Anil with steel scale he requested her not to beat him up as he was also from the staff. Thereafter she abused and threatened that she would get him dismissed from his job. And she also threatened Anil to take Sheela Back. Thereafter they came out of the Mahila Cell and went to nearby S.P. Office and at that time one K. K. Rao was SP There. They narrated all the incidents to him, on which he instructed to one person who was present there to ask the IO (Krishna) 'why such things had happened', then the said person alongwith them reached in the room of accused Krishna, but the said person did not inquire anything from her and thereafter they all returned. Thereafter he alongwith Anil returned to his house at Subh Enclave, Pitampura. He left Anil there at 11:00 p.m. and he returned to his house.
49. PW Bharat Singh, however, had not supported the prosecution that he had visited the CAW Cell. Even he denies the knowledge of marriage of Anil with Sheela.
50. PW-8 in his cross-examination, he stated that he had not met with Sheela and family members of Anil to settle the family disputes between Sheela and Anil. One day prior to 01.12.2005 in the evening hours when he visited Anil at PP Dost, then Anil requested him to accompany him for SP Office, Jhajjar and Mahila Cell in connection with the complaint lodged by Sheela. At 10:00 a.m. he reached at the house of Anil and immediately thereafter they proceeded to Jhajjar by his (witness) motorcycle.
FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 28 of 44 29They went to Jhajjar through Bahadurgarh and they reached at Mahila Cell at around 12:00 noon and they remained in there till 4:00 p.m. The SP office is located in the same premises and they reached in the office of SP at about 1:30 p.m. Thereafter they left for Delhi at around 4:00/5:00 p.m. However, Bharat Singh stayed back at Jhajjar. On the way, they stopped once at Gurgaon with their relative namely Rohtas Singh and from there, they stopped at Madipur for taking dinner and thereafter they returned to Subh Enclave, Pitampura. He stated that in the office of SP at Jhajjar they had only orally complained regarding the matter and no written complaint was lodged with SP Jhajjar. Anil had told the name of accused Mahavir and Jai Bhagwan on 01.12.2005 when they met them at Mahila Cell Jhajjar and prior to this he never met them. He admitted that parental home of Anil is situated at Village Khera Dabar in Delhi and Anil was residing on rent at Subh Enclave. He used to meet Anil sometime at Subh Enclave and sometime at Dost PP. He stated that he does not know from when Anil was residing at Subh Enclave. He never saw his wife with him at Subh Enclave.
51. In his cross-examination on behalf of Krishna, he stated that prior to meeting the IO, they had talked with accused Gumani Lal, Mahavir, Jai Bhagwan and Sheela but no settlement was reached regarding the dispute. The accused persons were insisting to take Sheela back to the house and they also insist why only two persons from their came to talk and not other. The said meeting was held outside of office and at that time IO was not present. They went to the office of SP and complained him that one lady, FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 29 of 44 30 who was in civil dress at Mahila Cell was beating them and when SP called some constable from outside and asked him who was the said female to which he said she was Krishna (IO).
52. He was confronted with the portion of his statement where the name of the IO as Krishna is not mentioned. He was also confronted with the portion of his statement that SP has sent constable with them. He was further confronted with the portion of his statement that IO had given beatings by iron futa (scale) where only word 'futa' is mentioned and 'iron' is not mentioned. He further stated that there was no other police man in the room where Anil was given beatings. He stated no entry was made in any register of SP when they went to met him and denied the suggestion that no such entry was made as they never met S.P. Or never made any complaint to him. This is only witness left as to what has transpired in the office of Mahila Cell Jhajjar. According to this witness beating was given by iron scale, although to this fact he was confronted with. Although he had stated in his statement u/s 161 Cr.PC that he was beaten by wooden scale. Other witness also stated so. However, MLC of the deceased which was made on the same very day after gap of about 12 hours shows no injury mark on the body, which falsifies testimony of PW-8 regarding beatings given by IO, Mahila Cell Jhajjar in the presence of the other accused persons.
53. Now coming to the aspect of recovery of the documents. PW-2 claims that Anil had made a call to her at 12:35 a.m. (mid night) and told her that he had consumed sulfas and was committing FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 30 of 44 31 suicide, as he had been beaten by I.O Krishna at the instance/complaint of Sheela and he is committing suicide due to the harassment and humiliation meted out to him by accused Sheela, Gumani Lal, Mahabir and Jai Bhagwan. She made call to Chander Hass and thereafter to Amit, her relative, who went to Subh Enclave, where her son Anil was lying and he shifted him to Jaipur Golden Hospital. In her cross-examination she stated Chander Hass went to the hospital and he informed her at about 1:30 a.m. that Anil is in hospital and he had consumed sulfas. She reached at the hospital at about 8:00 a.m.
54. PW-7 Chander Hass testified that he received telephonic call from Premwati but could not attend the call and he himself called back her and she told him that Anil had consumed something and is serious. She instructed him to visit Subh Enclave, where Anil was residing with his daughter. He immediately reached there alongwith his cousin Lal Singh. Anil was lying in semi conscious condition in the house. They immediately shifted him to Jaipur Golden Hospital and he was shifted to ICU. Later on, in the evening i.e. 02.12.2005, he expired in the hospital. Police was called. He further stated that the police also searched the house at Subh Enclave. One suicide note and other documents were recovered from the house and the same were seized by the police officials. The black powder seems to be sulfas was also recovered from the room at F61, Subh Enclave which was also seized.
55. In his cross-examination he stated that police was informed by the authorities of the hospital. His cousin Lal Singh had also FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 31 of 44 32 telephoned the police. He does not remember the time, when the police had reached at the hospital. It was afternoon. Police had taken his cousin Lal Singh and him to PS Mangol Puri. They remained there for a long time i.e. till 9:00-10:00 p.m in the night. His statement was recorded at Dost Police Post. They had gone to Dost Police Post on 03.12.2005. He could not say, when the document Ex.PW7/C was prepared and stated that the document Ex.PW7/D was prepared on 02.12.2005. (Ex.PW-7/C is seizure memo of documents from the room and Ex.PW-7/D is seizure memo of sulfas). He could not say, who had written the said document Ex.PW7/D, but the same was prepared by the police. The same was prepared at the spot. At the time of preparation of the aforesaid document, persons residing in the neighbourhood were called and only one landlord had come. He does not know, whether the statement of said landlord was recorded, or his signatures were obtained on the said document or any other document. They had reached the flat at around 10:00 or 11:00 a.m. on 02.12.2005 from Dost PP. They had reached Dost PP on that day, at around 8:00 a.m.
56. PW-8 Lal Singh testified that he alongwith Anil returned to his house at Subh Enclave, Pitampura and left Anil there at 11:00 p.m. and he returned to his house. In the same night, his cousin Chander Hass informed him that Anil had consumed some poisonous substance and he immediately reached his house where he was in serious condition and shifted him to Jaipur Golden Hospital and he also accompanied him and on the next day i.e. on 02.12.2005, Anil had expired. In his cross-examination, he stated FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 32 of 44 33 that he had not stated in his statement to the police that his cousin Chander Hass informed him that Anil had consumed some poisonous substance or that he had reached at his house where he was in serious condition and he was taken to Jaipur Golden hospital and he also accompanied him. Therefore this witness had made improvement regarding the fact of going to the house of deceased and bringing him to the hospital.
57. Similarly PW-7 Chander Hass was also confronted where he alongwith Lal Singh reached at the house of Anil where he was found in unconscious condition.
58. PW-11 Sh. Amit Yadav testified that on 01.12.2005, Anil alongwith Lal Singh (brother of Poonam) came at about 8 pm at WZ-216, Madipur, Delhi. Earlier, he reached at his house, but he was not present there, then he made a phone call to him, on which he told him to reach at WZ-216, Madipur. When, Anil met him, he was perplexed and he told that, he was called at Jhajjar Office/Court, where IO of the case in connection of the case, for which he was called there met him. His brother Anil told him that, he told to the lady IO that, there were not a big issue between him and his wife and only there was some misunderstanding, but IO of that case had misbehaved with Anil and also slapped Anil there. Anil also gave his reference to the said IO of that case that, he was also from the Staff of Delhi Police and, thereafter, the said lady IO of the that case had slapped him. This witness contradicted other witnesses who stated that he was beaten by wooden scale or iron scale whereas this witness claims that he FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 33 of 44 34 was slapped. Mother of the deceased Anil claims that he was slapped and beaten.
59. PW-11 further testified that Anil and Lal Singh were remained with him till 10.45 pm. Thereafter, Anil left for his flat at Pitampura. At about, 12.45-1.00 a.m. he received a phone call of mausi Prem Yadav and she told that, she had received a telephone call of Anil and Anil told to her that, he had consumed something and he wanted to end his life. After receiving the said information, he had reached at his house at Pitampura and when he reached there, Lal Singh and Chander Hass were already present there. The house of Anil was found locked and they entered in his house, after climbing the small wall of staircase, where Anil was found in unconscious state. Thereafter, they took him to the Jaipur Golden Hospital. He also made him to vomit after putting his hand in his mouth. He stated that he had inquired from him that, why he had consumed the poisonous substance and take such step, on which he told that, "as IO of that case had slapped and abused him, due to which he felt very insulted, although, the matter was not so serious that I had been beaten up by the IO, even after telling her that, I belonged to Delhi Police and the relation with my wife were not so strained".
60. In his cross-examination, he stated that Anil was residing on the room, which was constructed on the roof of the 2nd floor. He could not tell whether any toilet, bathroom or kitchen were also built up or not on the roof. When he reached at the gate of the premises in which his room was situated, then Chander Hass and FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 34 of 44 35 Lal Singh were already present there and met him on the ground floor, on the date of incident. Police recorded his statement on 02.12.2005 at 3:00 p.m. at Police Post Dost. He stated that in the night hours and till the death of Anil, no family members of Anil reached at the hospital and voluntarily stated that as in the hospital, when Anil was made to vomit, thereafter, he started talking with him, hence he presumed that Anil was improving his condition, hence, he had informed his Mausi and told her, not to visit the hospital at that very time and told to visit her hospital in the morning, as Anil was improving at that time.
61. He was confronted with the portion of his statement that at 8 pm, when he came at WZ-216, Madipur, he informed him regarding the incident happened at Jhajjar, where name of Anil is not mentioned and that of Lal Singh is mentioned.
62. He stated that he reached at the room of Anil, he was brought down on the ground floor, and firstly removed him to the hospital, however, on the way he enquired and Anil told about the incident. Therefore this witness has stated that deceased has told him that he was disturbed on account of slap given by IO despite he told him that he was constable in Delhi Police and relation with his wife was not so strained. There is no cross-examination to this aspect and therefore it is proved that deceased had told this fact.
63. Now coming to the recovery of the documents effected from the place of occurrence.
64. PW-19 Inspector Dharambir Singh Tomer deposed that he got the FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 35 of 44 36 FIR registered at around 3:30 pm. Thereafter he reached at the place of incident i.e. F-69, Subh Enclave, Pitampura. The spot was at second floor. He called the crime team, which also reached at the spot and inspected the scene of crime. He prepared site plan on the pointing out of PW Chander Hass, who met him at the spot. He seized black colour powder, seems to be sulfas from chatai and from the floor. He took the search of room and in search 6 documents were found i.e suicidal note, addressed to Commissioner of Police, Delhi, photo copy of Italahnama, notice U/s 160 Cr. PC, photo copy of C.L application for one day i.e for 01.12.2005 of Anil (deceased), one carbon copy of complaint, addressed to SHO Jafarpur and one application (information regarding family dispute). The abovesaid 6 documents were seized.
65. From the spot, he reached to Jaipur Golden Hospital, where he recorded the statement of witnesses, namely, Chander Hass and some other witnesses, whose names he does not remember. In his cross-examination, he stated that PW Chander Hass met him first time at the spot at around 3:50-3:55 p.m. He reached at the spot at about 3:40-3:45 p.m. He did not enquire from Chander Hass, as to for how much time, he was present at the spot. Chander Hass was present outside the room. 1-2 ladies apart from Chander Hass were present on the space at the stairs. He had opened the room after arrival of the crime team. He had not inspected any place before arrival of crime team. He did not call any public witness at the time of opening of the room. He had not sent Ex.PW-13/C and Ex.PW-13/F, which are suicide note and C.L. Application FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 36 of 44 37 respectively, for comparison to any hand writing expert to ascertain the executent of the said documents.
66. In his further cross-examination, he stated that he had visited only once to Women Cell, Jhajjar, Haryana and met the Inspector at Women Cell. He did not join any witness at Women Cell. He had spoken to Superintendent Police, Jhajjar but had not inquired from him about the IO of the case.
67. PW-13 Ct. Vijay deposed that from the hospital they reached at the spot and seizure was done. In his cross-examination he stated that at the time of seizure of sulfas, crime team, he himself and IO were present and Premwati was not present. No other person was present at the flat. Whereas Chander Hass stated in his examination that police searched the house and found suicide note and seized. He stated that police has taken his cousin Lal Singh with him to PS Mangol Puri and they remained there for a long time i.e. till 9:00-10:00 p.m in the night. He was not sure whether he put his signature on the documents which were prepared by the police. They had reached the flat at around 10:00 or 11:00 a.m. on 02.12.2005 from Dost PP, it is time when even FIR was not registered. Therefore either Chander Hass is not witness of seizure of the of alleged documents including suicide note from the place of occurrence or these are planted documents and not recovered from the place allegedly shown to have been recovered. Moreover, PW Chander Hass and two other witnesses who removed the deceased from the room to the hospital did not notice any document and those documents were found on the next day FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 37 of 44 38 after he expired. One may say that at the time he was in hurry to remove him to the hospital yet the recovery of the said documents in the manner shown is doubtful.
68. Even otherwise, lets have the look on the alleged suicide note which is Ex.PW-13/C. It is mentioned in the said suicide note that he is committing suicide after getting harassed from his wife Sheela Devi and her family members and is taking his daughter alongwith him and it is requested that after his death GPF, pension, LIC etc. were given to his mother Premwati or sister Sarita and he wanted that it should not be given to anyone and in case it could not be given to them it should be given to the brother of his wife Poonam, Chander Hass and in case it could not be given to him, it would be deposited to the government treasury. He requested that it could not be given to his wife and any person related to her at any cost as they used to threat him regarding this money. Admittedly this letter was not got compared regarding hand writing. As per this letter, Anil is taking his daughter alongwith him but where his daughter was ? Whether she was present at Subh Enclave ? This letter surprisingly does not find mention any incident at Mahila Cell Jhajjar regarding beating given to him by the IO nor it is mentioned any name of the IO.
69. The other documents are notice received by him from Jhajjar Mahila Cell to attend the proceedings, photocopy of CL application, the original of which however could not be found, carbon copy of complaint made to SHO PS Jafarpur, another complaint is given to DCP North West regarding intimation of FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 38 of 44 39 family dispute.
70. Now coming to all the evidence taken cumulatively. At the most there was allegations that deceased was harassed by his wife and she has left him and lodged complaint at Women Cell Jhajjar regarding dowry harassment, where he was given beatings by the IO, although the same has not proved, at Women Cell Jhajjar and thereafter he consumed sulfas and on the way he said that he was harassed and he had taken step as he was given slapped by the IO despite disclosing that he is from the staff. He also written letter to the DCP expressing his desire not to give pension to her wife and her family members.
71. Can all the evidence taken together amounts to abetting deceased to commit suicide. It is worthwhile to have overview on the law. Hon'ble Supreme Court in recent case titled as Amalendu Pal @ Jhantu v. State of West Bengal, 2010 (1) CC Cases (SC) observed with approval of its earlier judgments : To quote :
"12. At the outset, we intend to address the issue regarding the applicability of Section 306 IPC in the facts of the present case. Section 306 deals with abetment of suicide and Section 107 deals with abetment of a thing. They read as follows:
"306. Abetment of suicide. - If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine
107. Abetment of a thing. - A person abets the doing of a thing, who First.-Instigates any person to do that thing; or Secondly.- Engages with one or more other person FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 39 of 44 40 or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes places in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or Thirdly.-Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing.
Explanation 1.- A person who, by willful misrepresentation, or by willful concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that thing "
Explanation 2. - Whoever, either prior to or at the time of the commission of an act, does anything in order to facilitate the commission of that act, and thereby facilitates the commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act"
13. The legal position as regards Sections 306 IPC which is long settled was recently reiterated by this Court in case of Randhir Singh v. State of Punjab (2004) 13 SCC 129 ; 2004 (3) C.C. Cases (SC) 297 as follows in paras 12 and 13 :
"12. Abetment involves a mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding that person in doing of a thing. In cases of conspiracy also it would involve that mental process of entering into conspiracy for the doing of that thing. More active role which can be described as instigating or aiding the doing of a thing is required before a person can be said to be abetting the commission of offence under Section 306 IPC.
13. In State of W.B. v. Orilal Jaiswal this Court has observed that the courts should be extremely careful in assessing the facts and circumstances of each case and the evidence adduced in the trial for the purpose of finding whether the cruelty meted out to the victim had in fact induced her to end the life by committing suicide. If it transpires to the court that a victim committing suicide was hypersensitive to FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 40 of 44 41 ordinary petulance, discord and differences in domestic life quite common to the society to which the victim belonged and such a petulance, discord and differences were not expected to induce a similarly circumstanced individual in a given society to commit suicide, the conscience of the court should not be satisfied for basing a finding that the accused charged of abetting the offence of suicide should be found guilty."
14. Further in the case of Kishori Lal v. State of M.P. (2007)10 SCC 797 : 2007 (3) C.C. Cases (SC) 102, this Court gave a clear exposition of Section 107 IPC when it observed as follows in para 6 :
"6. Section 107 IPC defines abetment of a thing. The offence of abetment is a separate and distinct offence provided in IPC. A person, abets the doing of a thing when (1) he instigates any person to do that thing; or (2) engages with one or more other persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing; or (3) intentionally aids, by act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing. These things are essential to complete abetment as a crime. The word 'instigate' literally means to provoke, incite, urge on or bring about by persuasion to do any thing. The abetment may be by instigation, conspiracy or intentional aid, as provided in three clauses of Section 107 IPC. Section 109 provides that if the act abetted is committed in consequence of abetment and there is no provision for the punishment of such abetment, then the offender is to be punished with the punishment provided for the original offence. "Abetted" in Section 109 means the specific offence abetted. Therefore, the offence for the abetment of which a person is charged with the abetment is normally linked with the proved offence. [See also Kishangiri Mangalgiri Swami v. State of Gujarat (2009) 4 SCC 52]
15. Thus, this Court has consistently taken the view that before holding an accused guilty of an offence under Section 306 IPC, the Court must scrupulously examine FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 41 of 44 42 the facts and circumstances of the case and also assess the evidence adduced before it in order to find out whether the cruelty and harassment meted out to the victim had left the victim with no other alternative but to put an end to her life. It is also to be borne in mind that in cases of alleged abetment of suicide there must be proof of direct or indirect acts of incitement to the commission of suicide. Merely on the allegation of harassment without their being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused which led or compelled the person to commit suicide, conviction in terms of Section 306 IPC is not sustainable.
16. In order to bring a case within the purview of Section 306 of IPC there must be a case of suicide and in the commission of the said offence, the person who is said to have abetted the commission of suicide must have played an active role by an act of instigation or by doing certain act to facilitate the commission of suicide. Therefore, the act of abetment by the person charged with the said offence must be proved and established by the prosecution before he could be convicted under Section 306 IPC."
72. One slap given by IO and complaint filed by the wife at Mahila Cell Jhajjar would not fall within ambit of abetment. The abetment is, as law laid down, must be an active role by an act of instigation or by doing certain act to facilitate the commission of suicide.
73. The judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case titled as Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar v. State of M.P. (2002) 5 Supreme Court Cases 371 squarely applies to the facts of the present case. In the said case, the appellant was brother of wife of deceased and marriage between sister of appellant and deceased took place and FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 42 of 44 43 immediately after the marriage, she was subjected to continuous ill-treatment and family members forcing her to live separately and thereafter she went to her parental home and started living with her brother. Two months prior to the incident, appellant advised to take his sister back and to treat her properly. On the fateful day, appellant visited the house of parents of deceased and pleaded with them his sister should be rehablitated in the matrimonial home and should not be physically ill-treated or harassed. It is also alleged on that day appellant threatened parents of the deceased that if they do not mend their behaviour towards sister, he would be compelled to resort to filing a complaint u/s 498 A IPC to which parents of the deceased expressed helplessness as the deceased had been living separately from them. On this story was narrated to the deceased by his mother, then the deceased went to the house of the parents of the appellant followed by a quarrel between them. Thereafter deceased returned alone and told his brother and other acquaintances that the appellant had threatened and abused him by using filthy words and on the next day he was found hanging. He had also left suicide note on a stray piece of wrapping paper.
74. Hon'ble Supreme Court held that even if prosecution story is accepted and appellant did tell deceased "to go and die", that itself does not constitute the ingredient of "instigation". The word 'instigate' denotes incitement or urging to do some drastic or inadvisable action or to stimulate or incite. Presence of mens rea, therefore, is the necessary concomitant of instigation. It is common knowledge that the words uttered in a quarrel or on the FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 43 of 44 44 spur of the moment cannot be taken to be uttered with mens rea.
75. Similarly, in the case in hand, even if it is believed that wife of deceased i.e. accused Sheela Devi had filed a criminal complaint before Women Cell, Jhajjar, which was her legal right, and the deceased was also police constable who was well versed with the behaviour of the police in the police station or police atmosphere, had introduced himself as constable despite that IO slapped him in front of his in-laws to which he fell insulted, he had committed suicide. Even, if IO has given slap, it had no mens rea to instigate or incite the deceased to commit suicide. The role of Sheela and other family members at the Women Cell was only of their presence. Therefore it cannot be said that they had incited, instigated or abetted him to commit suicide by any stretch of imagination.
76. Therefore, as per above discussion, I am of the opinion that prosecution has failed to prove their case against accused persons beyond reasonable doubt. Hence accused persons namely Gumani Lal, Sheela Devi, Mahabir Singh, Jai Bhagwan and Krishana Devi are entitled to acquittal. Accordingly, they are acquitted of charges. Bail bonds of accused persons stand cancelled. Their sureties discharged. Case property, if any, be destroyed after the period of appeal. File be consigned to record room. Announced in the open court today i.e. on 22.05.2012 GURDEEP SINGH ASJ-03/Outer/Rohini/Delhi 22.05.2012 FIR No.: 873/05, PS:Mangolpuri State v. Gumani Lal etc. Page 44 of 44