BABURAM Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: MADHYA PRADESH)
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Click here to view full judgement.
Santosh Hegde, J. -
(1.)Deceased Bhagwan Devi was married to one Ram Kumar son of the appellant herein. It is stated by the prosecution that on 27-2-1988, the said Bhagwan Devi was found charred to death in the house where she was living with her husband, and at that time, the appellant was visiting them for about 3 days prior to the ghastly incident. After investigations, the Police filed a chargesheet against the appellant and his son under Sections 302 and 201, IPC and alternative charges were also framed under Section 306 read with Section 498-A, IPC. Almost all material witnesses examined by the prosecution had turned hostile and the trial Court after considering the material on record came to the conclusion that the charges under Sections 201 and 302 were not proved against said Ram Kumar and the appellant and, therefore, acquitted them of the said charges. However, both the accused, namely, Ram Kumar and the appellant were found guilty of the charges under Sections 306 and 498-A, IPC and were sentenced to undergo RI for 3 years under each count and both the sentences were made to run concurrently.
(2.)Aggrieved by the said conviction and sentence imposed on them, the appellant and his son Ram Kumar preferred Criminal Appeal No. 53/90 before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh and being aggrieved by the acquittal of the accused persons of the charges under Sections 302 and 201 read with Section 34, IPC the State of Madhya Pradesh had preferred Criminal Appeal No. 219/90 before the said High Court. The High Court tried both the appeals together and came to the conclusion that so far as Ram Kumar is concerned, his innocence is proved by the alibi set up by him and acquitted him of all the charges whereas it partly allowed the State appeal to the extent of the appeal filed against the appellant herein and found the appellant guilty of offences chargeable under Sections 201 and 302, IPC for having caused the murder of Bhagwan Devi and for having caused the disappearance of evidence for screening himself from the said offence and, consequently, sentenced the appellant to undergo RI for life under Section 302, IPC and further RI for 7 years for the offence held proved against him under Section 201, IPC with a direction that both the sentences will run concurrently.
(3.)It is against this judgment of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh that the appellant Babu Ram is before us. Mr. D.B.R. Vohra, learned counsel for the appellant, has contended before us that it is clear from the evidence of Dr. Fayaj Hussan, PW-1, that the death of the deceased Bhagwan Devi was caused not by strangulation but due to the burn injuries received by her. He also contended that the evidence of the said Doctor in regard to the ligature marks found on the neck of the deceased cannot be accepted as a definite conclusion of the said Doctor and in the absence of the prosecution producing any acceptable evidence for the purpose of proving strangulation, the High Court could have relied on probabilities alone to convict the appellant on the charge of murder. On behalf of the State, it was contended by Mr. Rohit Singh that there was enough circumstantial evidence to drive home the point that the death of Bhagwan Devi was not only caused by the burn injuries she received but also by strangulation and the prosecution has established beyond all reasonable doubt that it was the appellant who was last found in the residence where Bhagwan Devi was found murdered. Therefore, bearing in mind the motive emanating from the ill-will harboured by the appellant against the deceased for not having brought sufficient dowry, the High Court was justified in coming to the conclusion that the death in question was caused by strangulation and burning and both the acts must have been committed only by the appellant. Hence, the judgment of the High Court was unexceptionable.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.