Jammu & Kashmir High Court
State vs Nanak Raja Rao on 26 April, 2007
Equivalent citations: 2008(1)JKJ547
Bench: Virender Singh, J.P. Singh
JUDGMENT
1. State has preferred the instant appeal against the acquittal earned by the respondent-Nanak Raja Rao (for short hereinafter referred to as the accused) under Section 302 RPC, vide impugned judgment of learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu dated 05-10-2005.
2. The deceased in this case is Smt. Padmawati wife of the accused who as per the case set up by the prosecution had hanged herself to death in family quarter situated in DD Enclave (Nagrota). The factum of her death was got initially registered in the daily diary No. 25 dated 2-1-1998. Proceedings under Section 174 Cr. P.C, were got initiated by the Police. During the investigation, a Sari and piece of Wire which were stated to have used by the deceased to commit suicide were taken into custody. A bottle containing 150ml. of liquor was seized alongwith the vomited material. Other procedural formalities were also completed. Subsequently, FIR No. 3/98 was registered against the respondent and after he was formally arrested a Muffler was allegedly recovered from him pursuant to his disclosure statement. Copies of certain letters written in Telegue were also recovered. During the investigation it transpired that accused was coercing the deceased for managing a cash of Rs. 60,000/-, but she failed to meet his demand. He tied his Muffler around her neck and strangulated her to death. It was then alleged that he hanged the dead body from the ceiling with a Sari, and informed the guard on duty that his wife had committed suicide.
3. The prosecution has examined as many as 28 witnesses in this case which included the evidence of father and brother of the deceased also.
4. While discussing the evidence of father and brother with regard to the allegation of coercing the deceased vis-a-vis payment of Rs. 60,000/-, the learned trial Court has held that from the present set-up of evidence it revealed that accused was a short tempered man and even if it is believed that he had demanded Rs. 60,000/- from her, still it was difficult to conclude that for that reason he would go to kill his wife whereas it had come on evidence that relations between husband and wife were otherwise cordial.
5. The learned trial Court while discussing other set of evidence observed that certain other witnesses examined by the prosecution were not the witnesses to the occurrence and, therefore, they did not involve the accused in any manner. Some of them are the witnesses to the recovery, but they don't advance the case of the prosecution against him with regard to the main charge.
6. The learned trial Court dislodged the prosecution case with regard to the medical evidence also. We have gone through the same for our satisfaction. PW Dr. S.D. Thakur the Doctor who conducted the autopsy noticed as under:
1. Ligature mark over neck, starting from right angle of mandible passing above thyroid cartilage towards left along lower border of mandible upto nape of neck in middle, width ofmark-2cm. Base of mark dark brown, dry Mark incomplete underlying tissue of mark dry and glistering.
According to his opinion the cause of death was ASYPHYSIA due to hanging.
7. In the cross-examination this witness made it clear that there was no other external injury except ligature mark and in case of strangulation ligature mark is complete, whereas in a case of hanging it is incomplete. He made it further clear that in case of strangulation the ligature mark was below thyroid cartilage. He made it further clear that the finding of the postmortem report excluded strangulation as cause of death.
8. On the basis of the aforesaid medical evidence the learned trial Court observed that one has to rule out the role of the accused in causing the death of the deceased and entered into a detailed discussion. For our convenience, we reproduce the same:
38. Firstly, no external injury other than ligature mark was noticed on the body of deceased. Secondly the ligature mark was passing about thyroid cartilage. Thirdly, the ligature mark was incomplete. There were no visible tears on the clothes of deceased, or any sign of struggle. All these facts are suggestive of the fact that it could possibly be a case of suicide. The Doctor even rules out the strangulation as a cause of death, on the basis of his findings.
39. Apart from that hanging is usually suicidal. In case of homicidal hanging, usually more than one person are combined in the act, unless the victim is a child, or weak and feeble, or is rendered unconscious by some intoxicating or narcotic drug. Here one of the facts alleged is that accused administered alcohol to deceased and she vomited, and accused strangulated her to death, with his Muffler. The vomited material has been seized and sent to FSL after 18 days, and as per the report of Expert, the vomited material was found to contain Ethyl Alcohol. Same was seized during inquest proceedings on 2.1.1998, and for 18 days, it remained with Police, and who knows where it was kept during all this period. The possibility of same having been tampered can't be ruled out. That is because, sample remained with police for 18 days, and even the person in whose custody, sample was kept has not been identified, So much credit can't be given to the opinion of expert, in view of aforecited reasons.
9. The trial Court did not find the investigation of the present case above board and doubted it to a great extent which included even the recoveries from the accusec. pursuant to disclosure statement.
10 The observation of the Court is that one important fact which cannot be lost sight of is that the investigation while laying the charge sheet before the Court was not sure as to whether it was a case of homicidal or suicide. In observing r-o, the learned trial Court also relied upon a judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court rendered instate of U.P v. Gambir Singh and Ors. .
11. Mr. Gupta has not been able to pin point any infirmity in the impugned judgment either on facts or law which could call for the interference of this Court. We have also very minutely re-scanned the evidence on record and find that the impugned judgment is well reasoned one based on the appreciation of entire evidence in its right perspective.
12. Even otherwise, the scope of interference by this Court in the judgment of acquittal is very limited. Principles governing the interference in the judgment of acquittal are highlighted in Bhim Singh v. State of Haryana .
13. In a very recent judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Bacchudas 2007 Crl L.J. 1661, their lordships of the Hon'ble Apex Court have held that in an appeal against acquittal, no doubt the Court can review the entire evidence, but would interference only if there are compelling and substantial reasons. In the aforesaid judgment, the Hon'ble Apex Court has relied upon other various judgments of Supreme Court.
14. After having re-scanned the entire evidence and following the ratio of the aforesaid judgment, in our view, there are no compelling or substantial reasons for disturbing the acquittal already earned by the accused. Resultantly, the instant acquittal appeal is dismissed at admission stage itself having no merit in it. Records be sent back forthwith.