Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2000 DIGILAW 1405 (PNJ)

Chander Bhan v. State Of Haryana

2000-11-20

A.S.GARG, HARJIT SINGH BEDI

body2000
Judgment A.S.Garg, J. 1. The appellant Chander Bhan is an Ex-Serviceman, aged about 66 years. He has been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly causing the death of his daughter-in-law, namely, Sunita and his infant grand daughter Neetu by setting them on fire by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hissar vide judgment dated 30.9.1996 and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/-. In default of payment of fine he was ordred to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for two years. 2. Sunita deceased was married with Jagbir son of Chander Bhan on 8.7.1992. A minor child Neetu was born out of this wed-lock. Sunita hails from village Majra in district Hisar. Her husband hails from village Budana tehsil Hansi district Hisar. The parents of Sunita five in village Majra district Hisar. Siri Krishan Sharma an Advocate in district Bhiwani is the maternal uncle of the deceased. Sunita and her husband their infant child were living in Gurgaon another district of the State where he was employed in Maruti Udyog Ltd In village Budana the appellant along with his brothers widow was residing. Sometimes Sunita lived in village Budana and at other times with her husband in district Gurgaon. On 1.8.1994 Jagbir had brought Sunita and Neetu to Budana and left them with his father Chander Bhan. On 3.8.1994, Sunita came to village Majra and told her parents that her father-in-law i.e. the accused was a drunkard and after taking liquor he teased her for the purpose of preparing meat and remarks that the vegetables prepared were not properly cooked in time. On the assurance of her father that he would ask Jagbir, Sunita was sent to village Budana on 4.8.1994. On 7.8.1994 at about 10.30 A.M. Balbir Singh, a neighbour noticed that smoke was coming out from the house where Sunita was living and, therefore, he also found Sunita and the infant present there in burnt condition. On the assurance of her father that he would ask Jagbir, Sunita was sent to village Budana on 4.8.1994. On 7.8.1994 at about 10.30 A.M. Balbir Singh, a neighbour noticed that smoke was coming out from the house where Sunita was living and, therefore, he also found Sunita and the infant present there in burnt condition. The two other persons removed her and the child in a car straightaway to her fathers place in village Majra She allegedly made an oral dying declaration to her father Sham Sunder and brother Suresh that Chander Bhan appellant had asked her to cook non-vegetarian food and was teasing her and therefore when she could not prepare the said food he sprinkled kerosene and set her and her daughter Neetu on fire. After making the said oral dying declaration the deceased passed away and she was declared dead when she was brought to Civil Hospital, Bhiwani. 3. On receipt of message Ex.PT from Civil Hospital, Bhiwani, ASI Krishan Lal PW.9 went to the hospital and collected memos Ex.PU and PV regarding the death of Sunita and Neetu separately. He thereafter recorded the statement of Sham Sunder PW.6 Ex. PN and he sent the same for registration of a case to the Police Station. He called Rajesh Kumar PW.2, a photographer who took the photographs of the dead bodies of Sunita and Neetu. He aslo prepared inquest reports Ex.PC and PF. He sent the dead bodies for post-mortem. On the basis of the statement Ex.PN formal FIR Ex.PN/1 was recorded by SI Chandgi Ram PW.8, at 12.30 A.M. on 8.8.1994. The special report reached the Ilaqa Magistrate at 5.00 on 8.8.1994. Thereafter SI Chandgi Ram went to the place of occurrence. He prepared rough site plan Ex.PS of the scene of occurrence; lifted half burnt pair of chappal Ex. P 16 and P 17, a piece of cloth Ex. P 18, a burnt piece of gunny bag Ex. P 19 and a piece of polythene Ex. P 20 vide memo Ex. PL. He arrested the accused on 12.8.1994. On 13.8.1994 in pursuance of his disclosure statement Ex. PQ; Chander Bhan accused got recovered Zarican Ex. P21 which was taken into possession vide memo Ex. PR. 4. Dr. Satnarain Sharma, PW.1 conducted post-mortem on the dead body of Sunita on 8.8.1994 at 11.35 A.M. along with Dr. P 20 vide memo Ex. PL. He arrested the accused on 12.8.1994. On 13.8.1994 in pursuance of his disclosure statement Ex. PQ; Chander Bhan accused got recovered Zarican Ex. P21 which was taken into possession vide memo Ex. PR. 4. Dr. Satnarain Sharma, PW.1 conducted post-mortem on the dead body of Sunita on 8.8.1994 at 11.35 A.M. along with Dr. D.S. Chaudhary and found that the mouth was open with blood tinged fluid coming out. Eyes closed. Burns almost on whole of the body except a small area of perineum where red line of demarcation was present. Burns were superficial to deep. The skin was denuded at various places. The burns were almost 100%. Pleura, Larnyx, trachea were congested and contained blackish shoot particles. Both the lungs were congested and exudated dark blood. In the opinion of the doctor the death was due to shock and suffocation as a result of extensive burns which were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. Ex. PA is the copy of the post-mortem report. 5. On the same day, the said doctor along with Dr. D.S. Chaudhary, conducted post-mortem on the dead body of Neetu, the infant and found mouth was open with darkish fluid material trickling from one side and eyes closed. There was pugilistic posture. There were various grades of burn superficial to deep on almost whole of the body except a small part on the lateral side of left trunk where red line of demarcation was present. There was vassicle formation on the trunk specially on the back side. Skin was denuded at many places and at other place it looked parchment like. The burns were about 95%. Death in the opinion of the doctor was due to shock and haemorrhage as a result of extensive burns which were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. Ex.PD is the copy of the post-mortem. 6. The defence plea was that he deceased caught fire accidentally while she was cooking meals. In defence Suresh Kumar son of Beer Singh was produced as DW.1 who claimed that the accused and his son Jagbir were residing separately. Jagbir DW.2 son of Chander Bhan accused stated that the deceased was living separately from her father-in-law. He claimed that his father-in- law had a quarrel with the accused as the former was demanding Rs. In defence Suresh Kumar son of Beer Singh was produced as DW.1 who claimed that the accused and his son Jagbir were residing separately. Jagbir DW.2 son of Chander Bhan accused stated that the deceased was living separately from her father-in-law. He claimed that his father-in- law had a quarrel with the accused as the former was demanding Rs. 40,000/- and as the said amount was not paid his fathar Chander Bhan was involved falsely in this case. Balbir Singh PW.3, who happened to have taken the deceased to her parents house and to Civil Hospital, supported the case of the defence rather than the case of the prosecution. The learned trial Judge, however, believing the version of the prosecution contained in the oral dying declaration of the deceased held the appellant guilty under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him as indicated above. 7. This brings the appellant in appeal which is being resisted from the other side. 8. It is apparent that a charge under Section 304-B was not levelled against the appellant though the death of the deceased had taken place within seven years of the marriage. The husband is obviously not an accused nor any other member of his family. The alleged demand of money would not carry any significance and, therefore, reliance was only placed on the conduct of the appellant that he compelled the victim to prepare meat for him. The learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the case in hand refers to an absolutely false involvement of an innocent person in a case obviously because of the cruel death the deceased had met and her patents became emotional and got a story fabricated by way of oral dying declaration. It is alleged that the appellant was aged about 66 years at the time of the occurrence and is comparatively oldman. The deceased was a young lady. She was not new to the neighbours. There was nothing serious in the victims refusal to prepare the meat. There were other members of the family present in the house like widow of the brother of the accused and various hotels and the non-vegetarian food could be fetched from other places as well. The deceased was a young lady. She was not new to the neighbours. There was nothing serious in the victims refusal to prepare the meat. There were other members of the family present in the house like widow of the brother of the accused and various hotels and the non-vegetarian food could be fetched from other places as well. It was also not found that any bottle of liquor or any such material was recovered from the house search of the appellant and it cannot be said easily that the appellant was addicted to liquor. However, the learned counsels main attack is on the oral dying declaration and he has urged that there is a Civil Dispensary at Narnaud and a full fledged Civil Hospital at Hansi on the main G.T. Road which is on the way to Bhiwani and it was a journey of not more than 15/20 minutes. The deceased was taken to far off place in district Bhiwani. According to him, there was no safeguard to vouchsafe that the deceased was physically and mentally fit to make a statement after receipt of 100 per cent burns. 9. We have gone through the statements of Sham Sunder PW.6 and Suresh Kumar PW.7. Obviously they are not the eye-witnesses. Balbir Singh has not supported the case of the prosecution and he sided with the defence and supported defence version as DW. 3. There is no doubt that the deceased had died a very cruel death and every bodys sympathy would be with her. In such a situation the duty of the Court is difficult as it has to adhere to certain principles. The Court by itself cannot spin out a stroy to revert the case to under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code. Even otherwise there was no tangible evidence of the demand of dowry. A person who seeks justice must do justice himself. A person knocks at the door of the Court must come with clean hands. One must set up a cournect story before one can seek justice and the Court can bestow justice upon him. The version set up by the witnesses does not appear to be probable that merely because the appellant could not get non-vegetarian diet he would have set even his daughter-in-law on fire and the infant with whom he had no animosity. The version set up by the witnesses does not appear to be probable that merely because the appellant could not get non-vegetarian diet he would have set even his daughter-in-law on fire and the infant with whom he had no animosity. There was never a quarrel between the husband and wife. Fater-in-law and the daughter-in-law and the child as usual came to live in the village where there used to come many times. Other relations are already living there. They have not come into the witness box. In the given situation, it cannot be said with certainty that the deceased was alive when she was taken to the house of her parents or she was able to make a dying declaration as claimed. It is a great lapse on the part of the persons who were living with the deceased at the relevant time that they did not take her to the nearest Civil Hospital available. A Civil Hospital and various other Nursing Homes were available in district Hisar which are not at a great distance and could be covered within 30/40 minutes. Though the deceased was taken to a far way place which could be covered after more than an hour journey. Therefore, the version of the prosectuion that the deceased was set on fire by sprinkling kerosene prima facie appears to be manipulated and oral dying declaration as such does not appear to be truthful and it would not be safe to rely upon the same to convict the appellant. We are, therefore, of the firm opinion that the conviction and sentences of the appellant cannot be sustained. The appeal is allowed and the appellant is acquitted of the charges framed against him. Appeal allowed.