Punjab-Haryana High Court
Krishan Kumar And Another vs State Of Haryana on 22 February, 2010
Author: T.P.S. Mann
Bench: T.P.S. Mann
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Appeal No.1372-SB of 2009
Date of Decision : February 22, 2010
Krishan Kumar and another
....Appellants
Versus
State of Haryana
.....Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN
Present : Mr. Jagjeet Beniwal, Advocate
for the appellants.
Ms. Shalini Attri, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana
Mr. Akshay Bhan, Advocate
for the complainant.
T.P.S. MANN, J.
Alongwith the present appeal, the Court intends to dispose of Criminal Revision No.1969 of 2009 as both of them arise from the judgment and order dated 15/18.5.2009 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, (Fast Track Court), Bhiwani.
The appellants were tried for the offence punishable under Section 306 IPC read with Section 34 IPC on the allegations that on 19.3.2008, Urmila, since deceased, committed suicide by consuming some poisonous substance and the appellants, being husband and mother-in-law, respectively, of the deceased abetted the commission of such suicide. Vide Criminal Appeal No.1372-SB of 2009 -2- impugned judgment and order, the trial Court convicted the appellants for the aforesaid offence and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- each and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month.
Aggrieved of their conviction and sentence, the appellants filed the present appeal whereas complainant Arvind filed Criminal Revision No.1969 of 2009 with a prayer for enhancement of sentence of the two convicts.
The criminal proceedings were initiated against the appellants on the basis of a statement made by complainant Arvind before ASI Amir Singh in General Hospital, Dadri. He alleged that his sister Urmila, since deceased, was married to accused Krishan Kumar about ten years ago. However, her in- laws used to maltreat and harass her and whenever he visited her matrimonial home, she told him that her father-in-law Hukam Singh, mother-in-law Ram Rati and husband Krishan Kumar had been beating her. On 17.3.2008, when he visited her matrimonial home, her in-laws demanded a sum of Rs.30,000/-. Earlier also, they had already taken money from him. On 18.3.2008, in the evening,the complainant received a telephonic call from his sister that her in-laws were hatching a conspiracy to kill her. On 19.3.2008, he again received a telephonic message that her in- Criminal Appeal No.1372-SB of 2009 -3- laws were beating her, on which, he, alongwith his brother Narender and other family members, reached her matrimonial home in village Bigowa and saw her lying dead on a cot. She had consumed some poisonous substance herself due to harassment at the hands of her parents-in-law and husband or forcibly administered the same by them.
During the course of investigation, site plan was prepared by the police and statements of witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. were recorded. The proceedings under Section 174 Cr.P.C. were conducted on the dead body of Urmila. The appellants were arrested and after completion of the investigation, they were sent up for standing trial. However, Hukam Singh, father-in-law of the deceased was found innocent and not sent up for trial. Even the application filed under Section 319 Cr.P.C. for summoning him as additional accused was declined by the lower Court on 2.12.2008.
The appellants were charged for the aforesaid offence, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
The prosecution had examined complainant PW1 Arvind, PW2 Satender, PW3 Rati Ram, PW4 Inspector Mahabir Singh, PW5 C. Jagdish, PW6 ASI Bhudev Parkash, PW7 SI Jagphool Singh, PW8 ASI Amir Singh, PW9 Patwari Ramesh Criminal Appeal No.1372-SB of 2009 -4- Chander, PW10 Dr. P.K. Chaudhary, PW11 EHC Rajbir Singh, PW12 EASI Desh Raj, PW13 HC Surender Singh, PW14 HC Mal Singh, PW15 C. Manish Kumar and PW16 Inspector Shareef Singh and also tendered certain documents.
After the closure of prosecution evidence by learned Public Prosecutor, the accused were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. to explain the allegations levelled against them. They pleaded that they were innocent and falsely implicated in the instant case. Accused Krishan Kumar was the only son of his parents and his mother Ram Ratti remained ill since last so many years and his father was an ex-Army official who was serving as a Security Supervisor in a private concern M/s MAS Embroideries Private Limited at Gurgaon. He himself was serving in Army at Kupwara front which being a non family station and situated in a hilly area, he was not allowed to keep his family with him whereas deceased being a short tempered lady was insisting to accompany him to Kupwara. At the time of occurrence, he had come on two months leave from the Army and made the deceased to understand that he would take her with him to the next station i.e. Dehradoon after expiry of his leave. Still she kept on insisting not to live with his mother in the village. She was ill those days and by mistake took poisonous tablets taking the same to be medicine. They never demanded any amount from Criminal Appeal No.1372-SB of 2009 -5- PW1 Arvind or the deceased or from any other member of the in- laws of accused Krishan Kumar nor they harassed or gave any beating to her. When the deceased took poisonous tablets, accused Krishan Kumar immediately informed Arvind telephonically about this fact. He was regularly depositing money from his pay in the post office account of his wife at Bigowa and was also making payment towards RD account of deceased Urmila. He got her hospitalized. Prosecution witnesses had made improvements besides making false statements.
In defence, the appellants had examined Ombir as DW1 and perusing Kashmir Singh as DW2.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the evidence produced by the prosecution and the defence, the trial Court came to the conclusion that the prosecution had been able to establish the guilt of the appellants by proving that they abetted the commission of suicide by Urmila, making them liable to be punished under Section 306 IPC read with Section 34 IPC. They were, accordingly, convicted and sentenced, as mentioned above I have heard learned counsel for the parties and with their able assistance, scanned the entire evidence minutely.
PW1 Arvind, brother of Urmila, since deceased, had deposed that Urmila was got married with accused Krishan Criminal Appeal No.1372-SB of 2009 -6- Kumar about ten years ago. However, the appellants started maltreating her and used to demand precious things. They also used to give her beatings on failure of such demands. He visited her matrimonial home several times, where she apprised him that her parents-in-law and husband used to beat her. On 17.3.2008, he had gone to the house of his sister in village Bigowa to meet her, where her in-laws demanded a sum of Rs.30,000/- and threatened to kill her if their demand was not met. On 19.3.2008, her sister telephoned him and told that the appellants were planning to kill her. On 18.3.2008, he again received a telephone call from his sister, whereby she told that accused were beating her. Thereafter, he alongwith his brother Narender and other family members visited village Bigowa, where she was found dead. Police recorded his statement Ex.PB in the hospital, which bore his signatures. His sister was killed by accused by administering poison to her.
Satender PW2, cousin of Urmila, since deceased, deposed that on 19.3.2008 around 3.00 P.M., Arvind disclosed to him that her in-laws used to harass her. They reached village Bigowa at 4.30 P.M., where they found their sister dead. They enquired from her in-laws but no satisfactory reply was given.
Rati Ram PW3, uncle of deceased Urmila, deposed that the deceased had told him that her in-laws used to harass Criminal Appeal No.1372-SB of 2009 -7- her on account of demand of money and at the time of birth of child, some articles were given to her. One day prior to her death, Arvind took Sidha (gift) to be given at the time of Holi festival, where they demanded money and Arvind assured to pay within two or three days. On the next day, a telephonic message was received by him from Urmila that her in-laws were beating her. In the noon time, Arvind visited his house and told about another call, received by him. They went to village Bigowa where Urmila was found lying dead on a cot. Her parents-in-law and husband were present at the spot and, thereafter, they ran away. They brought the dead body to the hospital. She was harassed, tortured and killed by the appellants.
Inspector Mahabir Singh PW4 deposed that on 20.3.2008, having received ruqa Ex.PB, he registered formal FIR Ex.PC. C.Jagdish PW5 deposed that on 20.3.2008, he delivered the special reports to the Illaqa Magistrate, D.S.P., Dadri and the Superintendent of Police, Bhiwani. ASI Bhudev Parkash PW6 deposed that on 20.3.2008, he joined the investigation of this case under the stewardship of ASI Amir Singh and after post mortem of deceased Urmila, the doctor handed over viscera, two envelopes, sample seal and one box to ASI Amir Singh, which were taken into possession vide recovery memo Ex.PD. SI Jagphool Singh PW7 deposed that on 22.5.2008, he recorded the Criminal Appeal No.1372-SB of 2009 -8- statements of HC Mal Singh, EHC Rajbir Singh, MHC Surender Singh, and C. Manish Kumar under Section 161 Cr.P.C. ASI Amir Singh PW8 deposed that on 19.3.2008, having received a ruqa from General Hospital, Dadri, regarding the death of Urmila, he went there, where her brother Arvind met him. He asked him to give the statement, but he refused. On the next day, he recorded his statement Ex.PB. The doctor handed over to him one parcel of box, one envelope and viscera, which were taken into possession vide memo Ex.PD. He recorded the statements of witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Thereafter, he inspected the place of occurrence and prepared rough site plan Ex.PG. On return to the Police Station, he deposited the case property with the MHC. On 27.3.2008, he arrested appellant Krishan Kumar. PW9 Ramesh Chander Patwari, proved scaled site plan Ex.PH.
Dr. P.K. Chaudhary PW10 deposed that on 20.3.2008 he, alongwith Dr.Anita Gulia, had conducted post mortem on the dead body of Urmila on police request Ex.PJ. On examination, no external mark of injury was seen on the dead body. Small amount of vomit was present in larynx and trachea. Right and left lungs were congested. Left chamber of heart was empty and right chamber contained a little amount of blood. Heart with blood vessels were preserved for histopathological examination. Stomach contained liquid only. Mucosa of stomach was Criminal Appeal No.1372-SB of 2009 -9- congested and had foul smelling gases. Small intestines had mucosa congested and foul smelling gases present. Large intestines contained faecal matter and mucosa congested and with foul smelling gases. Liver, spleen, kidneys were congested and sent for chemical examination. Having seen the report of the chemical examination Ex.PA, he gave the opinion that cause of death was by aluminium phosphide.
EHC Rajbir Singh PW11, HC Surender Singh PW13, HC Mal Singh PW14 and C. Manish Kumar PW15 tendered into evidence, their affidavits Ex.PL, Ex.PM, Ex.PN and Ex.PO, respectively. EASI Desh Raj PW12 deposed that on 31.3.2008 he arrested appellant Ram Rati. Inspector Shareef Singh PW16 deposed that on 22.5.2008, he prepared the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. against the appellants.
On the other hand, Ombir DW1 deposed that he knew accused Krishan Kumar being his neighbour. On 19.3.2008 Krishan Kumar came to him and told that his wife had consumed sulphas tablet. Thereafter, he visited his house, where his wife was found telling some ladies that she had taken sulphas tablet by mistake. Thereafter, he brought her to PGIMS, Rohtak in his car and accused Krishan Kumar accompanied them. From his mobile No.9416581983, accused Krishan Kumar informed his in- laws.
Criminal Appeal No.1372-SB of 2009 -10-
DW2 Kashmir Singh, the ex-Sarpanch of village Bigowa deposed that on 19.3.2008 at about 4.00 P.M., he came to know that wife of accused Krishan Kumar had consumed some tablets. On this information, he went to the house of accused Krishan Kumar, where he was found present. The dead body of his wife was also lying on the cot. He enquired from Krishan Kumar if he had informed the police, who replied that he was already trying to inform the police on telephone. Then he informed the police in his presence. The police replied that they had no vehicle and desired that some vehicle should be sent to the Police Station. After about one hour, police came in the said vehicle and asked them to take the dead body to the hospital for post mortem. They put the dead body in the jeep. He, alongwith Krishan Kumar and others, accompanied the dead body. Simultaneously, the parental side of the deceased also reached there in a separate vehicle. He asked ASI to record the statement of Krishan Kumar but ASI replied that since the relations of the deceased from the parental side were insisting to record their statement on the next day after they consult their other relations, statement of Krishan Kumar could not be recorded. The brother and uncle of the deceased besides 10-12 persons were present there in the hospital.
From the evidence available on the record, it is Criminal Appeal No.1372-SB of 2009 -11- apparent that PW1 Arvind had come present in the hospital on 19.3.2008 where his sister Urmila was lying admitted. In such a situation, he would be busy in the treatment of his sister instead of lodging the report against the accused. In the meanwhile, the police had visited the hospital and wanted to record his statement but he stated that he would wait for his other relatives to come before making a statement. After Urmila passed away, the police started preparing the inquest. At that point of time, PW1 Arvind informed the police that his sister had been forcibly administered poison. After regaining composure, he made a detailed statement Ex.PB which was completed on 20.3.2008 at 12.35 P.M. in the hospital at Dadri wherein he expressed an apprehension that either his sister had died by consuming some poisonous substance or she was forcibly administered the same by her in- laws. Even while deposing before the trial Court as PW1 he stated that his sister had been killed by the accused by giving her poison forcibly. However, as is clear from the medical evidence there was no external mark of injury on the dead body. This ruled out forcible administration of poison. The factum of death of Urmila on account of consumption of poisonous substance stands proved from the testimony of PW10 Dr. P.K. Chaudhary, who had conducted the post mortem and the report Ex.PA of Chemical Examiner to Government of Haryana, Karnal as per which the samples of stomach, small and large intestines as well as of liver, Criminal Appeal No.1372-SB of 2009 -12- spleen and kidney were analysed and their contents gave positive test for aluminium phosphide.
From the testimony of PW1 Arvind, PW2 Satender and PW3 Ratti Ram, it stands established that Urmila, since deceased, used to be harassed and maltreated by the accused as she had failed to fulfill their demand for more money. She used to be beaten by the accused. When such an evidence is available on the file, it can safely be concluded that the accused had created such circumstances in her matrimonial home that the deceased was left with no other option but to end her life by consuming some substance.
According to the defence, deceased Urmila had consumed sulphas tablet by mistake, taking the same to be a medicine. According to DW1 Ombir when he visited the house of the appellants on 19.3.2008, some ladies had already gathered and Urmila, since deceased, was telling them that she had taken the sulphas tablet by mistake. However, according to DW2 Kashmir Singh, when he went to the house of the appellant, Urmila was already dead and her dead body was lying on a cot. He also stated that he did not know as to how she had died. However, he was told by the accused that he had taken some sulphas tablet. He had not noticed any container or wrapper of said sulphas tablet. There is, thus, no credible evidence that the Criminal Appeal No.1372-SB of 2009 -13- deceased had consumed the sulphas tablet by mistake. Even otherwise, sulphas tablet has such a strong and pungent smell that it cannot be taken by mistake. Therefore, it cannot be said that the sulphas tablet had been consumed by the deceased accidentally.
In the entire evidence led by the prosecution there was no specific allegation against Ram Ratti appellant. She happened to be the mother-in-law of the deceased. Only vague allegations were levelled that she, alongwith others, had been maltreating and harassing the deceased for not fulfilling the demand for more money. Hukam Singh, father of the deceased, was initially named as one of the accused. During investigation, he was found innocent and not sent up for trial. The evidence against Ram Ratti appellant being the same as was against Hukam Singh, it is not safe to sustain her conviction under Section 306 IPC. However, that would not absolve Krishan Kumar of the charge under Section 306 IPC. He did not take proper care of his wife and kept on harassing and beating her for not fulfilling the demand for more money.
The complainant has filed the revision with a prayer for enhancement of the sentence of the two convicts. However, such a revision on behalf of the complainant is not maintainable as only the State has the right to pray for enhancement of the Criminal Appeal No.1372-SB of 2009 -14- sentence by filing an appeal under Section 377 Cr.P.C. The State of Haryana has chosen not to file any such appeal. Therefore, no indulgence can be granted to the complainant in the revision filed by him.
Resultantly, the conviction and sentence of Ram Ratti appellant under Section 306 IPC is set aside. The conviction of Krishan Kumar appellant under Section 306 IPC and his sentence of imprisonment and fine, alongwith its default clause, is maintained. The appeal, i.e. Criminal Appeal No.1372-SB of 2009 is, thus, partly allowed, qua Ram Ratti appellant, while the revision, i.e. Criminal Revision No.1969 of 2009 filed by complainant Arvind Kumar, is dismissed.
( T.P.S. MANN )
February 22, 2010 JUDGE
satish