Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

07.12.2015 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Tinsukia in Sessions Case No. 49(T)/2014, whereby, the accused-appellant, Ananda Mura has been convicted under Sections 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 1,000/- (Rupees one thousand) only, in default of payment of fine, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for 6 (six) months.

2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that one Raimoni Mura, wife of late Ram Mura, resident of Mura Line, Bahadur Tea Estate, on 14.08.2013 lodged an Ejahar before the Officer-in-Charge of Bordubi Police Station alleging, inter-alia, that since the night of 12.08.2013 her daughter i.e. the prosecutrix was found missing from her house and at about 4-00 a.m. of 13.08.2013, she returned home with her clothes in an disorderly state. The prosecutrix disclosed that in the night of 12.08.2013, the accused Ananda Mura, a resident of the same Mura Line, after committing rape, had administered poison like substance to her. Knowing about the same, though the prosecutrix was immediately taken to Tinsukia Civil Hospital for medical treatment she was referred to the Assam Medical College Hospital (AMCH) at Dibrugarh for better treatment. However at about 9-00 a.m. on 13.08.2013, the prosecutrix died at AMCH, Dibrugarh while undergoing treatment.

15. PW. 4, Lago Mura is a resident of Mura Line and he knew both the prosecutrix and the accused. He deposed that one day in the morning at about 6-00 a.m. he saw the prosecutrix limping in the house of Lakhi Mura (PW. 2) while he was going to the field. The prosecutrix had consumed medicine. Then he took her to the Civil Hospital and from there, he took her Page No.# 7/16 to Dibrugarh Medical. He stated that the prosecutrix died at Assam Medical College Hospital, Dibrugarh. When he stated that he did not ask anything to the prosecutrix and he was not interrogated by the police, the prosecution, at that stage, declared him hostile. Thereafter, the prosecution side made a prayer to allow cross-examining this witness. On being so allowed, the prosecution side cross-examined him. In such cross-examination, PW. 4 declined the suggestion that he stated before the police that on 13.08.2013 at 1-00 p.m., when he went to the house of Smti Raimoni Mura hearing hulla, he came to know that her daughter (prosecutrix), aged 13 years, was missing since 12.08.2013. He also denied about knowing the accused committing rape upon the prosecutrix somewhere and thereafter, administering her poison due to which she became senseless. The defence side declined to cross-examine this witness.

31. From the evidence of autopsy doctor PW. 7, when he performed the post mortem examination of the dead body of the Prosecutrix he found the stomach congested with multiple submucosal haemorrhages at places and contained approximately 150 ml of dirty white liquid with kerosene like smell. The doctor, in his opinion, clearly stated that post mortem findings were suggestive of death due to organ phosphorus poisoning. A combined reading of all the attending facts along with the oral dying declaration and the findings of the autopsy doctor makes us to reach a conclusion that the Prosecutrix died of poisoning and the death of the Prosecutrix was due to administration of poison by other person and not due to self-consumption. Had it been due to self consumption, the Prosecutrix would not have made an attempt to reach her house. It is only when administration of poison like substance is made by any other person without the consent of the person administered the victim makes a effort to save himself by reaching a safe place like his house or a hospital. The Prosecutrix, in the instant case, appeared to have made such an effort. The doctor further opined that the result of organ phosphorus poising usually starts within half an hour of consumption.

36. Considering the evidence on record, in its entirety, in our considered view, that part of the statement of the Prosecutrix in her dying declaration that the accused had administered her medicine is acceptable in view of the fact that the Prosecutrix had died of organophosphorous poisoning which fact has been corroborated by PW. 7, the doctor who conducted the post mortem examination of the deceased on 13.08.2013 after her death on that day. We, therefore, find no difficulty in accepting the part of dying declaration of the Prosecutrix that the accused had administered her medicine which turned out to be organ phosphorous poison. If a person committing the act knows that it is so imminently dangerous that it must, in all probability, cause death or such bodily injury as is likely to Page No.# 16/16 cause death, and commits such act without any excuse for incurring the risk of causing death or such injury as aforesaid, then he is held to have committed the offence of murder, as defined under Section 300 IPC. The law is well settled that a conviction can be founded solely on the basis of dying declaration if the same inspires confidence.