Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

PW.1, the Doctor, who conducted post-mortem in his evidence stated that the deceased died due to asphyxia, as a result of strangulation, which was ante-mortem and sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. The burn injuries were 95 per cent on the entire body except on the feet and that the burn injuries were post-mortem. The Sessions Judge disbelieved the extra judicial confession spoken to by PW.15 and others. The Sessions court accepted the evidence of PW.1, the doctor, and other circumstantial evidence and found that Satish Kumar, husband of the deceased strangulated the deceased and the deceased was burnt to destroy the evidence. Giving the benefit of doubt to the brother and the parents of the respondent they were acquitted. The first respondent was found guilty of murder and was convicted for the offence of murder under section 302 and for screening the evidence of murder, s. 201 IPC and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and one year respectively and both the sentences were directed to run concurrently by the judgment dated April 23, 1981.

Regarding the distinction between anti-mortem and post- mortem burns, he pointed out the lines of redness, of vasication and reparative processes as distinctive features. He elaborated the same later. A reading of it gives the distinction and would be concluded thus:
1. Ante-mortem burn injuries are characterised by the presence of burnt caroon particles (soot) in the trachea which is absent in the case of post-mortem burn injuries.
2. Carbodyhaemoglobin is present in the heartblood in ant-mortem burning which is absent in case of post-mortem burning.
3. Ante-mortem burns are usually red owing to the tendency of the system of rush blood towards the injured parts for repairs, which is distinctly different from post- mortem burns which are hard and yellowish in colour.
4. Blisters are prominently present in ante-mortem burns. Some blisters may appear in post-mortem burns, but there are distinctly different from ante mortem burns, where blisters are full of protein rich fluid that contains a substantial amount of white cells, caused by the tendency of the system to rush in white cells to fight against infection. The presence of protein is so high that it becomes solid on heating. Post-mortem blisters hardly contain any protein in their fluid and whatever fluid is contained has so little protein that on heating only a faint opalescence is seen. The fluid in post-mortem blisters does not contain any white blood cells.

The contention of Sri U.R. Lalit that the palms were not clenched and the eyes did not protrude but were half closed, the mouth was closed and tounge was not protruding, the duration of death of 5 to 10 minutes as opined by the doctor and in the case of death by strangulation, the death would be instant and that, therefore, it is not a case of strangulation but suicide does not cast any doubt on the cause of death. Above study of medical jurisprudence establishes that the symptoms found at post-mortem are not uniform but variable depending on the compression as employed on the neck and duration. It would be an inferential fact since direct evidence would rarely be available. The discussion of the medical jurisprudence conclusively establishes that all symptoms found on the dead body of Shashi Bala unmistakeably show that her death was due to pressure on the neck and the findings at the post-mortem examination recorded by the doctor and the evidence of Dr. Sher Singh, PW-1, are consistent with medical jurisprudence. The duration of death also depends on the mode of pressure employed and the circumstances in which constriction was done. Doctor's evidence is clear, cogent and convincing in his findings that the death was due to asphyxia and not due to suicide. We place on record that Dr. Sher Singh had meticulously done an expert and excellent autopsy with grasp of medical jurisprudence to establish, without any shadow of doubt, of the cause of death of Shashi Bala as asphyxia.