STATE OF HARYANA Vs. RAVI KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SAVITA Rani (deceased) aged about 28 years at the time of her death, had been married to Mukesh Kumar Chopra in December 1982 and two children, aged about eight years and six years, had been born from the marriage. The relations between the couple were, however, strained which led to a divorce by compromise between them. As a result of the compromise, Savita Rani was paid a sum of Rs. 35,000/- in lump sum. Mukesh Kumar Chopra was supplier of general merchandise at Karnal and was working in association with Ravi Kumar accused. After her divorce, Savita Rani was remarried with Ravi Kumar on 15.11.1991. The couple then started to live on the first floor in the house of Om Parkash at New Colony, Ladwa with the ground floor being occupied by the landlord. It appears that sometime after this marriage as well, the relations between the couple got strained. As per the prosecution story this all happened on account of the fact that the accused had his eyes on the sums of money that had been received by Savita Rani as a settlement from her first husband. As per the prosecution story, on the evening of 17.2.1992 the couple quarreled and a severe beating was administered to Savita Rani by Ravi Kumar, but the quarrel was soon settled by the intervention of the neighbours. On 18.2.1992 at about 9/9.30 A.M. Om Parkash was taking tea, when he saw the accused running away. A short while later, Saroj Rani, a Sweepress, who was working for both the families went up-staris and then came running down-stairs shouting that smoke as well as shrieks were coming out of the kitchen of the house of the accused. Vijay Kumar, Gulshan Kumar, Som Nath and some others rushed up-stairs and found the door of the house bolted from the outside and on further opening the door they found Savita Rani lying in a badly burnt condition and crying for her mother. She was immediately brought to the Civil Hospital, Ladwa, but because of her precarious condition was referred to the L.N.J.P. Hospital, Kurukshetra where she died after a short while. The preliminary investigations were conducted by ASI Ram Singh, who inspected the place of incident and took into possession a bottle of kerosene oil and a match box etc. The post-mortem on the dead body was conducted by Dr. Balbir Bhardwaj (PW-2) on the next day and on the completion of the investigation, the case was committed for trial to the Court of Sessions for offences punishable under Sections 304-B and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. A charge, however, was framed under Sections 306 and 498-A thereof by the trial Court holding that no offence under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code could be made out.

(2.) THE prosecution in support of its case, relied on the evidence of PW-1 Dr. P.R. Pruthi of the Civil Hospital, Ladwa, who deposed to the effect that Svita Rani had been brought to the hospital in a serious condition; PW-2 Dr. Balbir Bhardwaj, who had conducted the post-mortem on her dead body and opined that the burn injuries were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature; PW-3 Shri Kuldip Jain, Judicial Magistrate, who had recorded the dying declaration of Savita Rani on 18.2.1992 in the L.N.J.P. Hospital, Kurukshetra; PW-10 Om Parkash, the learned and neighbour of the couple, who supported the prosecution story; PW-11 Dinesh Kumar and PW-12 Shyama Devi, the brother and mother of the deceased respectively, who deposed to the ill-treatment that had been meted out to the deceased and to whom the deceased had made an oral dying declaration that she had attempted to commit suicide as she had got fed up with the frequent beatings administered to her by her husband, i.e., the present accused and because he often demanded money from her; and PW-13 ASI Ram Singh, the Investigating Officer.

(3.) THE trial Court held that from a bare reading of the dying declaration, more particularly, the one given before Shri Kuldip Jain, Judicial Magistrate, it was clear that no case of abetment to suicide was made out as such a quarrel between the husband and the wife was common place. It was held that the dying declaration made to Dinesh Kumar (PW-11) and Shyama Devi (PW-12) was also not entirely proved as they had tried to embellish it and had several improvements vis-a-vis the one recorded by Shri Kuldip Jain. The Court, however, held that as there appeared to be some quarrel between the couple, a case under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code alone was made out. The trial Court, accordingly, while acquitting the accused under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, convicted him under Section 498-A thereof and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 250/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months.