Delhi District Court
State vs . Sazid Etc. on 1 May, 2017
State Vs. Sazid etc.
FIR No. 71/16
Police Station : Sultan Puri
IN THE COURT OF SHRI DEEPAK GARG:ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGEII
(NORTHWEST): ROHINI COURTS: DELHI
Sessions Case No. 53130/16
Unique Case ID: 02404R0165262016
State
Vs.
1. Md. Sazid
S/o. Hanif Mohd.
2. Hanif Mohd.
S/o. Alam Khan
Both R/o. B2/259260,
Sultan Puri, Delhi.
FIR No. : 71/16
Police Station : Sultan Puri
Under Section : 304B/498A/34 IPC
Date of Institution in Sessions Court : 02.05.2016
Date when judgment reserved : 01.05.2017
Date when judgment pronounced : 01.05.2017
JUDGMENT
1. This is the case under section 304B/498A/34 of Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Page No. 19 of 19State Vs. Sazid etc. FIR No. 71/16 Police Station : Sultan Puri
2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that Shahjade (complainant) had solemnized the marriage of his daughter Shahin (since deceased) with the accused Md. Sazid S/o Hanif Md. R/o Sultan Puri, Delhi, in May 2009. As per the complainant, he had given enough dowry in the marriage of his daughter Shahin as per his financial capacity. After the marriage, Sazid started demanding a car on this issue, he used to quarrel with Shahin and he used to beat her. This was told by Shahin to complainant on phone and also whenever she visited her parental house. Her father in law, Hanif Mohd. also allegedly beat her. On 26.01.2016, complainant received a phone call that Shahin is no more in this world. He alongwith his family members came to Delhi. His statement was recorded by the Executive Magistrate Rohini, Delhi, on the basis of which the present FIR was registered. Investigation was carried out. The accused persons were arrested. On completion of the investigation, chargesheet was filed in the Court of Ld. MM.
3. On compliance of Section 207 Cr.P.C, the chargesheet was committed to this Court by the Court of Ld. MM.
4. After perusing the material on record, charges under Sections 304B/498A/34 IPC were framed against all the accused persons, by my Ld. Predecessor Court, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
Page No. 19 of 19State Vs. Sazid etc. FIR No. 71/16 Police Station : Sultan Puri
5. In order to prove its case, the prosecution has examined in total 20 witnesses.
FAMILY MEMBERS OF DECEASED
6. PW5 Shahjade is the complainant/father of the the deceased, PW6 Rani, mother of the deceased, (their testimony shall be discussed in the later part of the judgment).
OTHER WITNESSES
7. PW13 Amit Kumar Singh (SDM), Executive Magistrate deposed that on 26.01.2016, at about 2.002.30 pm, he received an information from the then SHO, PS Sultan Puri, that a lady namely, Shahin was brought dead to SGM Hospital, Mangol Puri allegedly after hanging herself at B2/259, Sultan Puri, Delhi. On the receipt of the said information, he reached at the place of incident where he found that SHO PS Sultan Puri and other police officials were already present. He also found that the deceased had hanged herself up in the bathroom at the second floor of the said house. From the bathroom, he recovered a stole/ligature material having some hairs stuck on it which was seized by him. He made a seizure of the same vide Ex.PW13/A and handed over to the IO. He also made a seizure of the door bolt and two iron nails which were seized by him vide memo Ex.PW13/B and handed Page No. 19 of 19 State Vs. Sazid etc. FIR No. 71/16 Police Station : Sultan Puri over to the IO. He further deposed that on 27.01.2016, at about 2.00 pm, he reached at mortuary of SGM Hospital where he met the parents of the deceased. He recorded the statement of father of deceased namely Shahjade Ex.PW5/A. He made endorsement on the statement for SHO, PS Sultan Puri to take action as per law. He also recorded statements of the father and brother of the deceased regarding identification of the dead body Ex.PW5/B and Ex.PW6/A respectively. He prepared Form 25.35B Ex.PW13/C. He also made request for postmortem of the dead body to Incharge, Department of Forensic Medicine, SGM Hospital which is Ex.PW13/D. Thereafter, he left the hospital after handing over all the documents to the IO concerned. I can identify the piece of stole and the iron latch alongwith iron nails. He identified the case property i.e. the piece of latch and two nails Ex.P2 (collectively) and the piece of stole/ligature material of dark pink colour Ex.P3.
8. PW11 Shri Mukhtar Ahmed deposed that on 12.03.2016, SI Dinesh Dahiya had shown him an original Nikahnaama Ex.P1, and he had translated the same in Hindi, which is Ex. PW11/A.
9. PW12 Nirmala deposed that she is the neighbour of the accused persons and on 26.01.2016, in the morning, she was watching the programme of 26th January on TV at home. She heard some screams in the neighbourhood and went upstairs and saw that the wife of the Page No. 19 of 19 State Vs. Sazid etc. FIR No. 71/16 Police Station : Sultan Puri accused Sazid had committed suicide by hanging. At that time, accused Sazid and his mother were at home. Hanif was not at home. Azhar was also called, who had also come there. The deceased was taken to the hospital. She further deposed that the house of Hanif is three storeyed. Sazid and his wife used to live on the second floor of the said house.
10. PW14 Sairfuddin deposed that he mediated the marriage between Sazid and Shahin. He arranged the meetings of both the families and both of them got married on 31.05.2009. He put my thumb impression on the Nikahnama Ex.P1 as a witness.
POLICE WITNESSES
11. PW1: HC Praveen tendered his examination in chief by way of affidavit Ex.PW1/1 in which he deposed that on 26.01.2016, while posted as MHC(M) at PS Sultan Puri, he received the case property of the present case by SI Ravi in which respect he made entry no. 5416 in Register No. 19. He further deposed that on 27.01.2016, he received the case property of the present case by SI Ravi in which respect he made entry no. 5417 in Register No. 19. He proved the above said entry in Register no. 19 Ex.PW1/A (collectively). He further deposed that on 29.01.2016, the sealed exhibits of the present case alongwith their sample seal were sent to FSL Rohini through Ct. Raj Kamal vide RC No. 60/21/16 and 61/21/16 Ex.PW1/B and Ex.PW1/C respectively Page No. 19 of 19 State Vs. Sazid etc. FIR No. 71/16 Police Station : Sultan Puri and their receipts are Ex.PW1/D and Ex.PW1/E respectively.
12. PW3 Ct. Manju Kumari tendered her examination in chief by way of affidavit Ex.PW3/1. Further, she relied upon DD No. 18B dated 26.01.2016 recorded by her. Attested copy of the same is Ex.PW3/A.
13. PW4 Inspector Mahesh, Draftsman, Crime Branch, tendered his examination in chief by way of affidavit Ex.PW4/1. Further, he relied upon the scaled site plan is Ex.PW4/A, which was prepared by him after visiting the spot i.e. B2/259260, Second Floor, Sultan Puri, Delhi on 05.02.2016, prepared rough sketch and measurements and on the basis of that on 10.02.2016, prepared the scaled site plan Ex.PW4/A, and thereafter, destroyed the rough notes and measurements.
14. PW7 Rtd. SI Randhir Singh deposed that on 26.01.2016, on the instruction of the IO, he visited the spot i.e. B2/259, Second Floor, Sultan Puri Delhi alongwith the staff. Photographs of the spot were taken by Ct. Mukesh. He prepared the crime team report Ex.PW7/A. He further proved the 11 photographs Ex.PW7/1 to Ex.PW7/11.
15. PW9 Ct. Mahesh deposed that on 26.01.2016, he received a call from the Control Room that one lady is found hanging at B2/259, Sultan Puri, Delhi. He alongwith SI Randhir, Incharge and SI Manish Page No. 19 of 19 State Vs. Sazid etc. FIR No. 71/16 Police Station : Sultan Puri Bhardwaj, Finger Print Expert reached at the said place. On the second floor of the said house, one shawl was found tied with the window grill of the bathroom. The bolt of the door of the bathroom was found broken from inside and one pair of ladies shoes was found there. On the directions of IO and Incharge, Mobile Crime Team, he took total 11 photographs of the spot. The photographs are Ex.PW7/1 to Ex.PW7/11 respectively and negatives of the same are Ex. PW9/A (colly).
16. PW10 ASI Sanjay Shinde deposed that on 27.01.2016, at about 5.30 p.m., SHO Inspector Ashok Yadav came to him and produced a rukka, on the basis of which PW10 recorded present FIR. After recording the FIR, he handed over the original rukka and copy of FIR to Inspector Ashok Kumar. The FIR is Ex. PW10/A. He further deposed that he also made endorsement Ex.PW10/B on the complaint Ex.PW5/A. Certificate u/s 65B Indian Evidence Act is Ex.PW10/C.
17. PW15 Ct. Raj Kamal deposed that on 29.01.2016, HC Praveen handed over to him a sealed parcel alongwith the sample seal vide RC No. 60/21/14. On the same day, HC Praveen also handed over to him two sealed parcels alongwith the sample seal vide RC NO. 61/21/14 to be deposited at FSL, Rohini. He deposited all the said three pulandas and two sample seals at FSL Rohini against the receiving. After returning to PS, he handed over the copy of acknowledgment and Page No. 19 of 19 State Vs. Sazid etc. FIR No. 71/16 Police Station : Sultan Puri copies of both the RCs to the then MHC(M).
18. PW16 SI Ravi Kumar deposed that on 27.01.2016, on the instructions of SHO, PS Sultan Puri, he alongwith PSI Vikas reached at mortuary SGM hospital to assist the Executive Magistrate Sh. Amit Kumar Singh in conducting the postmortem on the body of the deceased Shahin. Executive Magistrate recorded the statement of father of the deceased namely Shahjade and also prepared the inquest papers. On the request made by the Executive Magistrate Amit Kumar Singh, postmortem on the body of the deceased was conducted. During autopsy, two exhibits i.e. viscera and scalp hair of the deceased were preserved. After conducting the postmortem, the dead body was handed over to its relatives. PW16 SI Ravi Kumar had already called Ct. Baldev at the mortuary and in his presence, PW16 seized the said exhibits vide memo Ex.PW16/A. After that he collected the postmortem report and reached back to PS. He handed over all the inquest papers that were handed over to me by the doctor concerned to the SHO and deposited the exhibits in the Malkhana.
19. PW17 SI Vikas deposed that on 27.01.2016, on the instructions of SHO, PS Sultan Puri, he alongwith SI Ravi reached at mortuary SGM hospital to assist the Executive Magistrate Sh. Amit Kumar Singh in conducting the postmortem on the body of the deceased Shahin. Executive Magistrate recorded the statement of father of the deceased Page No. 19 of 19 State Vs. Sazid etc. FIR No. 71/16 Police Station : Sultan Puri namely Shahjade and also prepared the inquest papers. On the request made by the Executive Magistrate Amit Kumar Singh, postmortem on the body of the deceased was conducted. After conducting the postmortem, the dead body was handed over to its relatives. After that SI Ravi collected the postmortem report and reached back to PS. SI Ravi handed over all the inquest papers to the SHO and deposited the exhibits in the Malkhana. He further deposed that he alongwith SHO and Ct. Baldev reached at B2/259, Sultan Puri, Delhi where accused Mohd. Sazid and his father Mohd. Hanif were present and both were arrested vide arrest memo Ex.PW5/D and Ex.PW5/E respectively.
20. PW18 SI Amit deposed that on 26.01.2016, the information regarding the death of deceased was received from SGM hospital, Mangol Puri and in pursuance to that he alongwith Ct. Baldev reached at SGM Hospital and collected the MLC of deceased Shahin. The body of the deceased Shahin was shifted to SGM mortuary. After that he reached at the spot i.e. B2/259, Seond Floor, Sultan Puri, Delhi. In the meantime, SHO Sultan Puri Inspector Ashok Kumar also arrived at the spot. Crime Team was called at the spot. The spot was inspected by the Crime Team. The Executive Magistrate was also called at the spot and he seized the exhibits from the spot. The said exhibits/parcels were handed over to PW18 SI Amit and he deposited the said exhibits at malkhana. He further deposed that on 05.02.2016, on his pointing out, the scaled site plan Ex.PW4/A was prepared by Inspector Mahesh.
Page No. 19 of 19State Vs. Sazid etc. FIR No. 71/16 Police Station : Sultan Puri
21. PW19 Inspector Ashok Kumar, SHO PS Sultan Puri deposed on 26.01.2016, DD No. 18A regarding the death of one Shahin, aged about 22 years, was received at PS Sultan Puri from SGM hospital. The said DD was marked to SI Amit for necessary action and in pursuance to that SI Amit wen to the hospital. PW19 Inspector Ashok Kumar received the information from him as well as the then Duty Officer regarding the factual situation obtaining at that time and in pursuance to that he also reached at the hospital and he observed one ligature mark and laceration above the left eyebrow. He called crime team and instructed the person concerned to send the crime team at the spot i.e. B2/259, Sultan Puri, Delhi. He took SI Amit along and reached at the spot. Prior to leaving the hospital, SI Amit got the dead body shifted to the mortuary. He made inquiries and it was revealed that the incident had happened on the second floor of the said premises. He went upstairs and found that a piece of chunni/stole was found hanging from a window of the bathroom with some hairs stuck on it. He also came to know that the marriage of the deceased had happened in the year 2009. It appeared to me to be the case of unnatural death and he called the SDM, Rohini Sh. Tapan Jha who in turn, sent Amit Kumar, Executive Magistrate at the spot for conducting the inquest. Sh. Amit Kumar Singh, Executive Magistrate arrived at the spot within one hour and conducted the inquest proceedings. The parents of the deceased were informed regarding the death of deceased Shahin. On that day, the Executive Magistrate seized the part of the iron latch and Page No. 19 of 19 State Vs. Sazid etc. FIR No. 71/16 Police Station : Sultan Puri nails. He also seized the stole with the hairs stuck on it vide seizure memos already Ex.PW13/B and Ex.PW13/A respectively. Crime Team inspected the spot and prepared the report. The report so prepared by the crime team was handed over to SI Amit.
22. PW19 Inspector Ashok Kumar further deposed that on the next day, he sent SI Ravi to the mortuary, SGM Hospital to assist the SDM/Executive Magistrate. SI Ravi came back to PS on the said day at about 4.00 pm and handed over to me the inquest papers and the statement of father of the deceased recorded by the Executive Magistrate with the endorsement requesting him to take action as per law. He made endorsement on the said statements and prepared the Tehrir Ex.PW19/A. He got the present case FIR registered and taken up the investigation. Thereafter, he took PSI Vikas, Ct. Baldev alongwith Driver and Operator to the spot. He also joined in the complainant, there PW19 met accused Md. Sazid and Hanif who were arrested after interrogation vide arrest memo Ex.PW5/D and Ex.PW5/E respectively. Their personal search were taken vide memos Ex.PW19/B and Ex.PW19/C respectively. He recorded the disclosure statement of both the accused persons vide memos Ex.PW19/D and Ex.PW19/E respectively. Thereafter, accused Sazid produced the Nikahnama which was seized by PW19 vide Ex.PW19/F. The Nikahnama is Ex.P1. Both the accused persons were lodged in lockup on that day and on the next day, they were sent to JC. He recorded the statements of witnesses and Page No. 19 of 19 State Vs. Sazid etc. FIR No. 71/16 Police Station : Sultan Puri thereafter, he marked the present case file to SI Dinesh Dahiya for further investigation.
23. PW20 SI Dinesh Dahiya deposed that on 29.01.2016, further investigation of the present case was assigned to him. He had submitted the FSL Form in malkhana and the exhibits of the case were sent to FSL through Ct. Raj Kamal. He further deposed that on 05.02.2016, he recorded the statements of members of crime team and scaled site plan Ex.PW20/A was prepared by Inspector Mahesh. He also recorded the statements of SI Amit and Inspector Mahesh. He further deposed that on 12.03.2016, the motherinlaw of the deceased was interrogated. Nikahnama regarding the marriage of deceased with accused Md. Sazid was got translated in Hindi through Mukhtar Ahmad and his statement was recorded in this regard. The translation of Nikahnama from Urdu to Hindi language is Ex.PW11/A. On the same day, he recorded the statement of public witness namely Nirmala and Saifuddin (neighbour of accused persons). He further deposed that on 16.03.2016, he made application Ex.PW20/B to Dr. Manoj Dhingra for giving subsequent opinion with respect to injuries as to ante mortem or postmortem in nature to the deceased and the doctor concerned made the endorsement on the said application. After completion of the investigation, he filed the charge sheet in the court. He further deposed that on 29.03.2017, he again made application Ex.PW20/A to the Dr. Manoj Dhingra regarding subsequent opinion on Page No. 19 of 19 State Vs. Sazid etc. FIR No. 71/16 Police Station : Sultan Puri ligature material whether hanging is possible with the ligature material or not and the doctor concerned made the endorsement on the said application. Supplementary challan was filed by him in respect of subsequent opinion and FSL result.
MEDICAL EVIDENCE
24. PW2 Dr. Manoj Dhingra, Incharge, Mortuary, SGM Hospital had conducted the postmortem on the body of deceased. He proved his detailed PM Report as Ex.PW2/A. He opined that in this case, the cause of death was Asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. He further deposed that he has also sealed viscera, sample seal of department and sealed hair and handed over the same to the IO. My detailed PM report is Ex.PW2/A bearing my signature at point A on each page of PM report.
25. PW8 Dr. Shankar Gupta, CMO, SGM Hospital, Mangol Puri, deposed that he had worked with Dr. Brijesh he identified his signatures on the MLC Ex.PW8/A at point A as he has seen him writing and signing in the course of his official duties.
ARGUMENTS OF BOTH SIDES
26. I have heard the Ld. Addl. PP and Ld. Counsels for the accused Page No. 19 of 19 State Vs. Sazid etc. FIR No. 71/16 Police Station : Sultan Puri and have perused the material available on record.
27. It is argued by the Ld. Counsel for the defence that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubts. It is stated that in the examination, both the witnesses i.e. PW5 Shahjade, father of the deceased and PW6 Smt. Rani, mother of the deceased have not supported the case of the prosecution at all and there is no other material witness examined by the prosecution to prove its case except the witnesses of medical examination and the investigation conducted by the police.
28. Per contra, Ld. Addl. PP for the State has argued that prosecution has been able to prove its case beyond the reasonable doubts.
FINDINGS OF THE COURT
29. After hearing, Ld. Counsels for the defence and Ld. Addl. PP for the State, the court is giving its findings, in the following paragraphs.
30. Dr. Manoj Dhingra, Incharge, Mortuary, SGM Hospital, Mangol Puri Delhi (PW2) had conducted the postmortem on the body of deceased Shahin. On external examination, the following injuries were found:
(i). Ligature mark seen with width 2 cm & 35 cm long present above Page No. 19 of 19 State Vs. Sazid etc. FIR No. 71/16 Police Station : Sultan Puri the thyroid eminence in midline of neck running upward & backward obliquely on both sides and absent over nape of neck. It is 7.1 cm below chin, 1.2 cm below right ear, and 4.5 cm below left ear. The mark was dry, brownish, parchmentised. Cut section shows glistening white subcutaneous tissue. No damage seen on neck muscles.
(ii). Laceration wound present over left forehead of size 3 x .5 cm muscle deep just above left eye over left eyebrow. In his opinion, death is due to Asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. He has proved the detailed postmortem report which is Ex.PW2/A.
31. There is nothing on record to controvert the above medical evidence. As per the case of the prosecution, she had committed suicide by hanging.
32. The case of the prosecution is that both the accused i.e. Mohd. Sazid (husband of the deceased) and Hanif Mohd. (father in law of the deceased) subjected her to cruelty by making illegal demands for dowry from her and harassed her and soon before her death also, she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by both of them. As a result of which she committed suicide. It has been held in Kaliayaperumal Vs. State of TN (2004) 9SCC 157 that the essential ingredients for constituting an offence u/s 304B IPC are under:
(1) The question before the court must be whether accused has committed the dowry death of a woman.Page No. 19 of 19
State Vs. Sazid etc. FIR No. 71/16 Police Station : Sultan Puri (2) The woman was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or his relatives.
(3) Such cruelty or harassment was for or in connection with any demand of dowry.
(4) Such cruelty or harassment was soon before her death.
33. The term dowry would include that property or valuable security which is actually given or which is agreed to be given, in relation to the marriage of the person in question. The property or valuable security may be given or may be agreed to be given before marriage or at the time of marriage or at any time after the marriage, so long as, it is a connected with the marriage, but there has to be a link between the property given or agreed to be given at the time of marriage.
34. Section 498A IPC is much wider in nature. It makes an offence when the husband or the relatives of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty. The term "Cruelty" means not only harassment to the woman with a view to coerce her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security but it would also include any willful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to committed suicide or to cause grave injury to herself.
35. The question which arises for consideration is whether deceased Shahin was at any point of time subjected to cruelty as define u/s 498 Page No. 19 of 19 State Vs. Sazid etc. FIR No. 71/16 Police Station : Sultan Puri A IPC or whether soon before her death, she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by the accused for or in connection with any demand of dowry by the accused persons within the meaning of Section 304B IPC.
36. It is relevant here to state that present FIR was registered on the complaint of Sh. Shahjade who is the father of the deceased. During the investigation, IO also recorded the statement of Smt. Rani, mother of the deceased. They are the witnesses who could have proved that her daughter Shahin was treated with cruelty in her matrimonial house by the accused within the meaning of Section 498A IPC or soon before her death, she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by the accused for or in connection with any demand for dowry.
37. It is relevant her to state that both the said witnesses that Shahjade (PW5) and Smt. Rani (PW6) have not supported the case of the prosecution at all. Their statement is in sync with each other. Both of them have deposed that the relations between their daughter and her husband were normal and their daughter did not complain at any point of time that she was being treated with cruelty or harassment in relation to demand of dowry or otherwise on any other pretext or ground. They deposed that they did not know anything why their daughter had committed suicide by hanging. Both the said witnesses have been cross examined by the Ld. Addl. PP for the State but nothing Page No. 19 of 19 State Vs. Sazid etc. FIR No. 71/16 Police Station : Sultan Puri had come out in their cross examination. In their cross examination by the State, they have denied that both the accused persons used to inflict physical cruelty and harassment upon their daughter in pursuance to unlawful demands of dowry or otherwise. They have denied the suggestion that whenever their daughter used to visit them, she used to tell about the harassment being meted out to her in her matrimonial house. They have further denied the suggestion that several times she (deceased) complained telephonically that both the accused persons had beaten her up after pulling her hair and banging her head against the wall in pursuance to the demand of car because the accused persons were not satisfied with the dowry given in the marriage.
38. No other witness has been cited or examined by the prosecution who could have proved about cruelty or harassment allegedly caused by the accused persons upon the deceased in the matrimonial house.
39. The testimony of the remaining witnesses only relates to the medical examination of the deceased and the investigation conducted by the police officials and the testimony of the said witnesses is of no help to the prosecution, in view of the above, in proving its case.
40. In view of the above, since there was no incriminatory evidence on record, statement of both the accused u/s 313 Cr.PC was dispensed Page No. 19 of 19 State Vs. Sazid etc. FIR No. 71/16 Police Station : Sultan Puri with.
41. In view of the above discussion, in the opinion of this Court, it can be said that the prosecution has miserably failed to establish its case beyond the reasonable doubt and hence, both the accused persons are acquitted from the charges framed against them. Bail bonds are cancelled and sureties are discharged.
42. Requisite bond u/s 437A Cr.PC have been furnished on behalf of both the accused.
43. The case property, if any, is confiscated to the same and same be destroyed after the period of appeal/revision, and if appeal is filed, subject to the order of the Ld. Appellate Court.
44. File be consigned to Record Room.
Announced in the open court
st
on this 1 day of May, 2017.
DEEPAK GARG)
ASJII, NORTHWEST
ROHINI: DELHI
Page No. 19 of 19