Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

8. Ms. Richa Kapoor, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State on the other hand with all her vehemence urged that all these appellants were trying to hide their crime under the cover of alleged statement made by the victim to the PW-13 (Ambulance incharge) and PW-25, Doctor Nitin Kumar, who had conducted the medical examination of the victim and prepared the MLC, were informed by the victim that the cause of her getting burnt was due to accidental fire while working in the kitchen. Contention raised by the learned APP was that the FSL report proved on record as Ex.PW-33/A supported by the post mortem report (Ex.PW-27/A), supplementary post mortem report (Ex.PW-32/B), testimonies of PW-1, PW-2, PW-9, PW-10 and the other corroborated evidence, clearly proves that the death of the victim was an unnatural death and the said unnatural death resulted due to her murder at the hands of these appellants. Learned APP for the State had invited attention of this court to the FSL report Ex.PW-33/A wherein Dr. Madhulika Sharma, Senior Scientific Officer clearly opined that the Ex.3A and Ex.3B gave positive test for organophosphorous insecticides and Ex.1 and Ex.2 were found to contain residue of kerosene oil. Learned APP also submitted that after receipt of the said FSL Report, supplementary opinion was sought by the prosecution from the post mortem doctor and vide supplementary post mortem report proved on record as Ex.PW-32/B the post mortem doctor opined that death of the victim was due to combined effect of shock due to burn injuries and organophosphorous poison. Placing reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in Rajbir vs. State of Haryana, reported in AIR 2011 SC 568, learned APP for the State submitted that this court may enhance the sentence of these appellants after taking into consideration the medical and scientific evidence proved on record or in the alternative, to remand the matter back to the trial court for framing the additional charge under Section 302/34 of IPC against all the appellants. Learned APP for the State also addressed extensive arguments on the other aspects of the case.

9. This is an unfortunate case of a young woman of 28 years who got married with the appellant -Yash Jain on 23.01.1998 but lost her life within a short span of two and a half years. There is no doubt and there can't be any, between the prosecution and the defence that the victim had died due to burn injuries and as per the MLC proved on record she had suffered 75% burn injuries. The victim was taken in the CAT Ambulance Van to JPN Hospital when she was accompanied by the appellant - Mr.Subhash Chand Jain. As per MLC report proved on record as Exhibit 15/A the victim was admitted in the JPN hospital on 13.6.2000 at 6.00 p.m. Ironically, in the column "name of relative or friend" name of Shri Dharam Singh, who was a junior ambulance officer, has been mentioned instead of father-in-law of the victim. The MLC also disclosed the history of assault as disclosed by the victim to the doctor being that she had sustained burn injuries while she was cooking food and her sari caught fire. MLC also discloses the condition of the patient as cautious/oriented and her vital stable. In the left hand column of the MLC the patient was shown to be unfit for her statement at 6.50 p.m, at 9.30 p.m. on 13.6.2000 and also at 1.30 a.m. and 7.00 a.m. on 14.6.2000 by the doctor who attended the victim. The victim hardly survived for 15 hours. Rukka Ex.PW-1/A was prepared based on the statement of the deceased PW-1, Smt. Kamlesh Jain and on the basis of rukka, FIR was registered by the police. After the death of the victim, the SDM had conducted the inquest proceedings on 14.06.2000 and thereafter dead body was sent for autopsy examination. The doctor conducting the post mortem of the dead body, handed over the scalp hair and vicesera of the deceased to the Investigating Officer which was taken into possession by the police vide Memo Ex. PW-7/A and the same were deposited by the Constable Virender (PW-7) in the Malkhana on the same day. The burnt clothes of the deceased, Ex.P-2 to Ex.P-4 were also taken into possession vide Memo Ex.PW-3/A after breaking open the lock of matrimonial house, which was the place of incident i.e. house No. 4676/21, Ansari Road, Darya Ganj by the police in the presence of the SDM. The burnt clothes of the deceased, her scalp hairs and her Viscera were sent for scientific analysis to the Forensic Science Laboratory on 10.07.2000 and the FSL Report to this effect was proved on record by the prosecution as Ex.PW33/A. The first post mortem report and the supplementary post mortem report were proved on record as Ex.PW27/A and Ex.PW32/B. In the first post mortem report Ex PW 27/A, the post mortem doctor opined that the cause of the death of the victim was due to shock consequent upon her receiving 75% burn injuries. It was further opined that all injuries were ante mortem, recent in duration and were caused from flames due to fire. It was further stated that the scalp hair sample has been preserved at the request of the SDM and Viscera of the deceased was preserved for chemical analysis to rule out any common poisonous substance. The result of examination as opined in the FSL report dated 7 th December 2001 with regard to Ex.1 and Ex.2 and Ex.3A and Ex.3B are reproduced as under:-

11. In the supplementary post mortem report, which was proved on record as Ex.PW-32/A, Dr. Rohit, Sr. Resident, Dept. Of Forensic Medicine MAMC, New Delhi after having examined the first post mortem report Ex.PW-27/A and FSL report Ex.33/A, gave his opinion with regard to the death of the deceased being due to combined effect of shock due to burn injuries and organophosphorous poisoning.

12. Dr. Rohit (PW-32), Dr. Madhulika Sharma (PW-33) and Dr. Akash Jhanjee (PW-35) were duly cross-examined by the defence.

17. It is quite evident that the said FSL report and the supplementary post mortem report was placed on record by the prosecution even prior to recording of the statements of the accused persons under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. and we find no reason for the learned trial court for not framing an additional charge under Section 302/34 of IPC against the accused persons. Even from the body of the judgment, we find that the learned trial court had discussed these reports but in Para 67, it gave a reason by saying that had the FSL report come in time, probably the case could have been investigated form the angle of presence of organophosphorous poison, which was found to be contained in the stomach of the deceased, Shalu Jain. It is a settled legal position that under section 216 Cr. P.C the charges can be amended by a trial court at any stage during a trial. The said section reads as under