Criminal appeal against conviction for abetting suicide. High Court acquitted appellants, finding prosecution evidence fabricated, unreliable, and suffering fatal delays.
Impugned judgment and sentence set aside; appellants acquitted.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
Crl.Appeal No.841-SB of 1998
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl.Appeal No.841-SB of 1998 Date of Decision:08.03.2010
Rani and another
.....Appellants
Versus
The State of Haryana
.....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR
Argued by: Mr.Sunil Panwar, Advocate, for the appellants.
Mr.G.S.Chahal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana, for the respondent-State.
MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR, J.(Oral)
Impugning the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 01.09.1998, appellants-Rani and Bhawani @ Girgu, have directed the present appeal, vide which they were convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years, to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months, for the commission of offence punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34 IPC by the trial court.
Crl.Appeal No.841-SB of 1998
2
prosecution claimed that appellant-Bhawani was having illicit relations with appellant-Rani and he oftenly used to visit her house at Rewari.
3
Crl.Appeal No.841-SB of 1998
against the appellants examined PW1-Dr.Sudershan Panwar, PW2-Retd. Inspector Sat Pal, PW3-Mahavir Singh, Draftsman, PW4-Head Constable Abhey Singh, PW5-Constable Rohtas, PW6-Smt.Surji wife of Basanta, PW7-Basanta son of Bhuru, PW8-Head Constable Jai Pal, PW9complainant Ram Avtar son of Basant Lal and PW10-ASI Vijay Singh, in oral evidence, besides tendering into evidence certain documents and the same will be referred to at the appropriate places in the subsequent part of this judgment, in order to avoid repetition.
“The case is a counter-blast, to shut the demand of maintenance and dowry articles and also to cover up the own fault by which they harassed and pressurized Ram Singh, prior to his death, for payment of the balance amount of Giarsi's Bhat ceremony. I am innocent. I have been falsely implicated in this case”.
Crl.Appeal No.841-SB of 1998
4
5
Crl.Appeal No.841-SB of 1998
place of incident on 17.12.1996 on the pointing of ASI Vijay Kumar. 17. Likewise, PW4-Head Constable Abhey Singh stated that on 13.06.1997(Sic) in the wake of ruqa from the Civil Hospital, Rewari, with regard to the death of Ram Singh due to consumption of poison, he reached the hospital and conducted the inquest report(Ex.PD). He also recorded the statements of the witnesses and sent the dead body to the hospital for its post-mortem examination along with the inquest report. PW5-Constable Rohtas Singh and PW8-Head Constable Jai Pal, are the formal witnesses, who have only tendered into evidence their affidavits, Exs.PF and PH, respectively.
6
Crl.Appeal No.841-SB of 1998
to the police station but no action was taken by the police. His son Ram Singh used to maintain a diary(Ex.P1), which he had handed over to the police along with some photographs(Exs.P2 to P10), which were taken into possession by the police vide recovery memo(Ex.PG). It may be mentioned here that during the course of trial, the exhibition of photographs were objected to by the defence counsel and the objections were kept open for its decision at the time of arguments.
“ Stated that Ram Singh now deceased, was my brother. He was married with Rani d/o Chand Lal about ten years back. Rani was having not good relations with her husband and was having illicit relations with other persons. Due to this, Ram Singh used to remain under tension. He used to maintain a diary. Number of times, I had gone through that diary. Since, Ram Singh used to remain tension due to bad beahaviour of the accused Rani, he committed suicide. I have gone through the hand-writing of Ex.P-1. All the entries in this diary are in the hand-writing of Ram Singh. I got this diary from the almirah of my brother Ram Singh. Letters (some are love letters) Ex.P-12 to Ex.P-18 were also in this diary, when I got it from the almirah of my brother Ram Singh and were written by accused Rani. The photos Exs.P2 to P7 are of the accused Rani, which I had got them from this diary, Ex.P1. I had shown these papers, photos etc. to the police but no action was taken despite the fact that I met the Superintendent of Police, Rewari, in this regard. I therefore vide my application Ex.P1 reported the matter to my Commanding Officer at Madras ” .
7
Crl.Appeal No.841-SB of 1998
who deposed that on receipt of complaint-Ex.PI(undated) through his senior officer, he recorded the formal FIR(Ex.PI/1). On 07.09.1996, he inspected the spot and prepared the rough site plan(Ex.PJ) with its correct marginal notes. On 22.09.1996, accused Rani, who was on anticipatory bail, joined the investigation and was formally arrested. On 10.10.1996, he took into possession diary(Ex.P1), photographs(Exs.P2 to P8) vide recovery memo (Ex.PG) and also recorded the statements of the witnesses. He also arrested accused Bhawani on 22.10.1996. According to PW10, after completion of the investigation, Inspector/SHO Sat Pal prepared the police report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. and he identified his signatures on it. This is the entire evidence brought on record by the prosecution.
8
Crl.Appeal No.841-SB of 1998
suicide against the appellants, therefore, the appeal deserves to be accepted for the reasons mentioned here-in-below.
Crl.Appeal No.841-SB of 1998
9
conducting the inquest proceedings, recorded the statements of appellantRani, PW7-Basanta son of Bhuru, father of the deceased and Lala Ram son of Hoshiar Singh, wherein appellant-Rani described the manner of incident and stated that her husband committed suicide by consuming some poisonous substance and nobody is to be blamed in this respect.
Crl.Appeal No.841-SB of 1998
10
PW6 and PW7, appellant-Bhawani used to visit the house of the deceased very often. The illicit relations inter se between the appellants were known to them from the very beginning. They did not raise any accusing finger towards the appellants in this relevant connection. PW6 admitted that appellant-Rani lived with them for about ten days after the incident in village and, thereafter, lived in Rewari in her house. It has come in the evidence that complainant PW9 Ram Avtar came from Madras to village Pithrawas four/five days after the incident and remained there for about one month. Even till then, neither PW6 or PW7, parents of the deceased, nor PW9 complainant Ram Avtar and Yad Ram, brothers of the deceased suspected and did not raise any accusing finger towards the appellants in this relevant behalf. It was only after 2- ¾ months i.e., on 07.09.1996, the present case was registered on the basis of alleged undated complaint filed by PW9 to his Commanding Officer at Madras, particularly when, it remained an unfolded mystery that how and in what manner, the complaint allegedly written by PW9 to his Commanding Officer at Madras, reached the concerned police station, on the basis of which FIR(Ex.PI/1) was recorded against the appellants. Neither PW6, PW7 or any other person disclosed to anybody with regard to the alleged illicit relationship inter se between the appellants, nor anybody previously lodged the FIR against them for the reasons best known to them. No cogent explanation is forthcoming on record in this context. In that eventuality, the possibility of false implication of appellant-Rani in order to deprive her legitimate share in the property of her deceased husband, cannot possibly be ruled out in the obtaining circumstances of the case. 33. The trial Judge, while ignoring these inherent improbabilities and convicting the appellants, mainly relied upon an entry dated 01.01.1995 contained in the diary(Ex.P1) allegedly maintained by one Dr.R.S.Bharti and the photographs of appellant-Rani only. Having analysed the matter deeply, to me, the trial court has fell in legal error in this direction and no implicit reliance can be placed on the entries contained in the diary and the photographs. This evidence appears to be subsequently fabricated and deserves to be outrightly rejected for more than one reasons. At the first instance, the prosecution did not prove that it was Ram Singh deceased, who maintained the diary(Ex.P1). Secondly, it did not legally prove the
11
Crl.Appeal No.841-SB of 1998
entries of the diary and the photographs. Neither any hand-writing expert has been examined to prove that the hand-writing contained in diary(Ex.P1) was actually of Ram Singh deceased, nor the negatives of photographs and Photographer has seen the door of the court. Learned State Counsel has utterly failed to explain that in what manner, unproved photographs of Rani alone would indicate the commission of crime by the appellants. The findings recorded by the trial court rebel against the realism and lose their sanctity and credibility.
Crl.Appeal No.841-SB of 1998
12
half year prior to the incident, would directly relatable to the death of the deceased. It is a matter of fact that all the photographs only depict the photographs of appellant-Rani alone and not of the appellant-Bhawani. Moreover, there is a positive evidence on record that Ram Singh shifted from village Pithrawas to Shiv Colony, Rewari and started the business of embroidery in order to earn his livelihood. It has also come in the evidence that the deceased was short of earnings and his parents used to give him money help very often. The deceased had spent the money of his share at the time of marriage(Bhat) ceremony of his sister and he also took Rs.1,000/- from Rani and the remaining amount was borrowed by him. He was residing with his wife and two children in a rented accommodation in Shiv Colony, Rewari. In other words, it is established on record that Ram Singh was short of funds and was under pressure to repay the loan borrowed by him from Yad Ram. In that eventuality, the possibility of his committing suicide for some other reasons, than as projected by the prosecution, cannot possibly be ruled out.
Crl.Appeal No.841-SB of 1998
13
the FIR, which is fatal to the prosecution case, false, fabricated and discrepant evidence of the prosecution and totality of other facts and circumstances emanating from the evidence on record, as discussed here-inabove, are put together, then to my mind, conclusion is inescapable and irresistible that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the charge under Sections 306/34 IPC against the appellants and they deserve the benefit of reasonable doubt in this respect.
Needless to say, the compliance and procedural consequences would follow accordingly.
March 08, 2010 ( MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR) seema JUDGE
Whether to be referred to reporter?Yes/No
Crl.Appeal No.841-SB of 1998 14
3 issues framed by the court
Whether prosecution proved abetment to suicide beyond reasonable doubt.
Whether inordinate delay in lodging FIR vitiates prosecution case.
Whether fabricated diary and photographs sustain conviction.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rani
Bhawani @ Girgu
The State of Haryana
Mehender Singh Sullar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
