Punjab-Haryana High Court
Munni Devi @ Sunita vs State Of Haryana on 11 October, 2012
Author: Rajiv Narain Raina
Bench: Hemant Gupta, Rajiv Narain Raina
Criminal Appeal No.11-DB of 2008 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Appeal No.11-DB of 2008
Date of Decision:11.10.2012
Munni Devi @ Sunita ......Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana ......Respondent
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV NARAIN RAINA
***
Present: Mr. Sameer Sachdeva, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. S.S. Patter, Sr. D.A.G. Haryana.
****
1. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
****
RAJIV NARAIN RAINA, J.
This appeal has been filed by Munni Devi alias Sunita w/o Ram Singh resident of Village Malara Bass, District Mohindergarh, against the judgment dated 31.10.2007 of the learned Sessions Judge, Narnaul, convicting the accused-appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (for short "IPC") as also against the order of sentence of even date whereby she has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life on being found guilty of causing death of her husband Ram Singh, besides, imposing fine of Rs.3,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for six months.
The prosecution case is that FIR No.209 was registered at Police Station Kanina District Mohindergarh on 12.10.2006 under Sections Criminal Appeal No.11-DB of 2008 2 302, 328 IPC on the statement of Jagmal Singh son of Mangal Singh, elder brother of the deceased. He stated that he is one of five brothers and retired from the Education Department. The youngest of the siblings was Ram Singh, deceased. The brothers resided separately but in proximity of each other with Ram Singh's house adjacent to his. Ram Singh had three daughters and a son from his first wife Ram Devi. The daughters were married and the son who is aged about 13-14 years was mentally disturbed. Ram Devi expired seven years prior to the date of occurrence. During the life time of Ram Devi, Ram Singh had brought the appellant Munni Devi @ Sunita to live with him as his wife and she bore him two sons aged 6 ½ years and 3-4 years. Munni Devi @ Sunita belongs to Orissa (Odisha). The couple were wont to quarrel. The reason was her insistence to transfer his landed property in her name for security. She would go to Orissa for long spells and return to the matrimonial home. She left for Orissa 30 days before the occurrence and returned a fortnight later.
On the intervening night of 11/12.10.2006 at about 12/1 O' clock, at night Jagmal Singh-complainant woke up to ease himself in the toilet. He saw Munni Devi appellant returning from the street towards their house. This was cause for suspicion and he followed and saw Munni Devi washing the mouth of Ram Singh with a cloth while Ram Singh was lying on the cot in the courtyard. Ram Singh was lying dead on the cot and foul smell was coming from his mouth. Jagmal Singh-complainant asked Munni Devi as to what has happened to which she gave no proper answer. It appeared to him that Munni Devi had murdered his brother Ram Singh by administering some poisonous substance. He called the neighbours and telephoned Ram Singh's daughters of the incident. The daughters arrived. Criminal Appeal No.11-DB of 2008 3 He left for the police station for getting his statement recorded. The statement was signed and attested by him. Since a case under Sections 302, 328 IPC was made out, a ruqqa was sent through constable Dharmender for registration of a case. Kanwal Singh ASI proceeded to the place of occurrence to start the investigation proceedings. A Special report was sent to the Area Magistrate and to the designated officers at 11 a.m. The accused was arrested. The inquest report was prepared. The apparel of the deceased worn at the time of death was taken into possession. The cause of death was recorded due to administration of poisonous substance. The age of the deceased was about 66 years. The appellant at the time was aged 30 years.
During investigation, the appellant made a disclosure statement. She explained that she had two sons through Ram Singh and feared that her sons might be deprived of landed property and for this reason she insisted upon her husband transfer land in her name but Ram Singh did not accede to the request. She explained that she had brought a vial "sisi" of medicine to kill the rats which she concealed in the house and when opportunity presented she mixed the contents of the vial "sisi" in a bottle of liquor and served it to her husband Ram Singh mixed with a small portion of the poison. She concealed the rest of the medicine in the vial "sisi" beneath the soil and the empty bottle of wine in the Guwara of her brother- in-law Jagmal Singh (complainant) situated behind their house. She said that vial "sisi" and an empty bottle were hidden at place which no one except her knew. On the disclosure statement, recovery was made of an empty plastic bottle kept concealed in the grass with the label "Contessa XXX Rum" and one concealed phial "sisi" the lid of which read "New Improved Green/Iodex Rub" was recovered after she dug it out of the soil. Criminal Appeal No.11-DB of 2008 4 These were taken into possession and sealed for transmission for chemical examination. On conclusion of the investigation the police filed the final report under Section 173 Cr. P.C before the Court.
The Judicial Magistrate Ist Class by his order dated 7.12.2006 committed the case for Sessions Trial. The charge was framed against the appellant on 19.1.2007 by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge under Sections 302 and 329 IPC. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution examined eleven witnesses to bring home the charge.
Jagmal Singh-complainant appeared as PW-1 and fully supported the prosecution case. He deposed that on 10.10.2001, Munni Devi pressurized Ram Singh to deliver money to her and also to transfer his land in her name and on the following day Ram Singh appointed the accused as his nominee in his account with State Bank of Patiala with Rs 1,27,000/- lying to his credit. He deposed that on the fateful night, he had got up to relieve himself and had switched on the light. He saw the accused-Munni Devi going towards her house briskly from the side of his guwara. He followed her and found her cleaning the face of Ram Singh who was lying on a cot in the courtyard. The complainant confronted her on the spot and discovered his brother had vomited and there was foul smell emanating from him. Ram Singh had died. The brothers of the deceased gathered as well as the family members. The daughters of the deceased resided in village Tigara and village Mohan Pur were called and they reached at about 8:30 a.m. It was decided to report the matter to the police. The complainant then proceeded to lodge the FIR.
Sher Singh-PW-2 deposed that the accused was arrested immediately on 12.10.2006 and during interrogation, she had suffered Criminal Appeal No.11-DB of 2008 5 disclosure statement Ex.P2 to the effect that she had administered poison to Ram Singh and had concealed the vial and the bottle in the guwara of Jagmal. She led the police party to the disclosed place resulting in recovery of a bottle from the grass and of a vial unearthed after digging. These were taken in separate sealed parcels vide recovery memo Ex.P3 to Ex.P5.
Dr. Kanwar Singh, Medical Officer, Community Health Centre Mohindergarh appeared as PW-4 and deposed that on 12.10.2006 he alongwith Dr. Surender Yadav had conducted post mortem examination on the dead body of Ram Singh on police request Ex.P6 and prepared postmortem report copy of which is Ex.P8 (Ex.P7 is the report received from FSL). In his opinion, the death took place due to administration of Organophosphorous pesticide. He deposed that viscera of the deceased had also been handed over to the police for chemical analysis after postmortem examination.
PW-10/Virender Singh, Head Cashier State Bank of Patiala, Malara Bass (Bazwana) Branch, District Mohindergarh deposed that deceased Ram Singh had opened a savings bank account with the Bank in June 1994 and appointed his wife Ram Devi as nominee. But on 11.10.2006, he named Sunita Devi-appellant as his nominee of the Bank account in place of Ram Devi deceased. The nomination form is Ex.P22.
It would be relevant to point out from the evidence of Smt. Sapna/PW-3 daughter of deceased Ram Singh, who deposed that the couple would quarrel with respect to transfer of land and money in the name of the appellant. The rest of the prosecution evidence is of a formal nature relating to procedural aspects which would not detain us to go into any detail for the purposes of decision in appeal.
Criminal Appeal No.11-DB of 2008 6
On conclusion of the prosecution evidence, the incriminating material gathered against the appellant was put to her under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The allegations were denied and she pleaded innocence and false implication. She asserted that she was merely working as a maid servant in the house of the deceased and had never asked him to transfer his land or money in her name and never administered poison to him. The accused- appellant did not lead defence evidence.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record of the case.
The post mortem report had confirmed the death by poisoning and left the exact poison to be determined on the examination of the viscera. The report of the Chemical Examiner confirms that the death of Ram Singh was as a result of administration of Organophosphorous. The FSL report confirmed that Organophosphorous pesticide and ethyl alcohol were detected in exhibits 3a and 3b i.e. stomach, parts of small and large intestine; parts of lung, liver, spleen and kidney of the deceased. Ex.2 sent under parcel/seal impression 3-RS discloses some black coloured granular material approx. 5gm stated to be poison was in fact Organophosphorous pesticide. The blood report confirmed presence of ethyl alcohol in the strength of 57.5 mg%. The report is dated 2.3.2007 issued by the Forensic Science Laboratory, Haryana, Madhuban, Karnal signed by the Assistant Chemical Examiner to Government of Haryana. An empty plastic bottle with lid labelled as CONTESSA and one sealed cloth parcel enclosing a glass vial containing exhibit-2 confirmed presence of Organophosphorous pesticides.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the present is not Criminal Appeal No.11-DB of 2008 7 a case of homicide and there is no direct evidence linking the accused with the administration of poison to the deceased. It is at best a case of circumstantial evidence. Learned counsel would point out certain minor inconsistencies in the statements of PW-1/Jagmal Singh; PW-2 Sher Singh and PW-11. He submits that it may be a case of suicide.
Minor contradictions can occur in the statements of witnesses recorded after lapse of time. We have no reason to disbelieve the statement of Jagmal Singh brother of the deceased. He had seen the accused cleaning the face of his brother while lying on a cot in the courtyard. He had confronted her on the spot. He further deposed that there was no glass or cup at the place of occurrence. There was no water near the cot. He deposed that his brother was not a drunkard.
It is established on record that one day prior to the death, Ram Singh transferred the land and money in the name of the accused-appellant. Having achieved her purpose, she wasted no further time in taking the life of Ram Singh. She was aged about 30 years at the time of occurrence. Ram Singh was 66 years. He was old. The motive behind the crime is firmly established on record. The medical evidence establishes the death as a result of poisoning by use of organophosporus. If the complainant did not mention in his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that the accused begged pardon from him on being surprised would not be sufficient to discard his testimony. If there was no bottle found lying near the cot of the deceased it would not make the prosecution story suspect. The fact that the money and land was transferred in the name of the appellant a day prior to the occurrence; that the accused did not dispute her presence in the house of Ram Singh on the night intervening 11/12.10.2006; that her name was Criminal Appeal No.11-DB of 2008 8 entered as nominee in the bank account of the deceased one day prior to death; that the disclosure statement led to recovery of vial and bottle containing the poisonous substance confirms our belief that the links in the chain of events in the present case leads only to one conclusion of death by homicide at the hands of the appellant beyond any reasonable doubt. Organophosphorous pesticide is known to emit such foul smell as it can only be forcibly administered. Thereby ruling out suicide.
For the foregoing reasons, there is no merit in this appeal and the order of conviction and sentence of life imprisonment recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge is upheld.
The appeal is, consequently, dismissed.
( HEMANT GUPTA ) ( RAJIV NARAIN RAINA )
JUDGE JUDGE
11.10.2012
rajeev