Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 514 (MP)

Ramkali Bai v. State of M. P.

2009-04-18

A.K.MISHRA

body2009
JUDGMENT 1. The accused-appellant has preferred the instant appeal aggrieved by judgment dated 16th August, 1999 delivered by the Court of Second Additional Sessions Judge, Burhanpur, in S. T. No. 183/98 thereby convicting the appellant for commission of offence u/s 498A of the IPC and sentencing her for two years S.I. and fine of Rs. 1,0001-, in default of payment to fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for two months. Appellant has been acquitted of commission of offence under section 306 IPC. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 19.6.1998 accused Ramkalibai had abused the deceased Rakhibai due to which she poured kerosene oil on herself and committed suicide. Her dying declaration was recorded by doctor as well as by Naib Tahsildar in Nepanagar Hospital. Rakhibai died due to burn injuries on 20th June, 1998. Offence under section 306 IPC was registered. The accused was charge sheeted. 3. Accused abjured the guilt and contended that she had been falsely implicated in the case. She used to reside separately along with her second son Ashok, there was distance between their houses, she had not harassed the deceased. 4. The prosecution has produced two dying declarations (P-2) recorded by Dr. Madhuri Khare (PW 1) and (PW 3) recorded by K.M. Patil (PW 11), Naib Tahsildar. The appellant has been acquitted of the commission of offence under section 306 IPC. The trial Court has found that it was an accidental burn injuries in paras 12 and 13 of the judgment. It was not a case of commission of suicide, however, the appellant has been convicted for commission of offence under section 498A IPC, aggrieved thereby the instant appeal has been preferred. S. Shri I. Hussain, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that there is no evidence on record with respect to cruel behaviour having been meted out. Trial Court has found that it was not a case of commission of suicide, it was an accidental death. Thus, it could not be said to be a case under section 498A IPC. The appellant has been illegally convicted by the trial Court. 6. Shri S.K. Rai, learned GA appearing for the State has supported the judgment. He has submitted that from the dying declarations (P-2 & P-3) which have been proved cruelty as contemplated under section 498A IPC is made out. 7. The appellant has been illegally convicted by the trial Court. 6. Shri S.K. Rai, learned GA appearing for the State has supported the judgment. He has submitted that from the dying declarations (P-2 & P-3) which have been proved cruelty as contemplated under section 498A IPC is made out. 7. In the instant case, there are two dying declarations (P-2 & P-3), (P-2) has been proved by Dr. Madhuri Khare (PW 1), second dying declaration (P-3) has been proved by K.M. Patil (PW 11), Naib Tahsildar. The aforesaid dying declarations have been relied upon by the trial Court to convict the appellant. Though the factum of recording of dying declarations stand proved from the version of aforesaid witnesses but the question which arises for consideration is whether evidence on record is sufficient to amount to cruel behaviour as contemplated under section 498A IPC. A reading of (Ex. P-2), dying declaration of deceased Rakhibai, indicates that deceased had quarreled with her mother-in-law Ramkalibai on the point that why Rakhibai (dead) had put the soil at the place where the cows were to be tied. Her husband had intercepted and then he had gone out. Thereafter her mother-in-law wanted Rakhibai to go away from the house and threatened to pour kerosene oil on herself, deceased tried to snatch the container of kerosene, accidentally it fell upon her, stove was burning nearby due to which she caught fire. It would be a case of accidental fire caught by the deceased. As per dying declaration there used to be quarrel between mother-in-law and the deceased but evidence is missing what was point of such quarrel which are not uncommon. Another dying declaration (Ex. P-3) of the deceased, recorded by K.M. Patil, Naib Tahsildar indicates that when she was preparing tea in the morning she had a quarrel with her mother-in-law. She poured kerosene oil and then she was in search of match box, she caught accidental fire due to stove. What emerges from the aforesaid dying declarations is that there used to be some quarrel between mother-in-law and the deceased. On the date of incident mother-in-law wanted to pour kerosene oil on herself. If (P2) dying declaration is relied upon, the kerosene oil container accidentally fell down upon the deceased. In the dying declaration (P-3) it has not been mentioned that there used to be consistent harassment by the motherin-law. On the date of incident mother-in-law wanted to pour kerosene oil on herself. If (P2) dying declaration is relied upon, the kerosene oil container accidentally fell down upon the deceased. In the dying declaration (P-3) it has not been mentioned that there used to be consistent harassment by the motherin-law. Section 498A IPC requires that whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty and such a conduct has to be willful which is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health. There is total absence of evidence as to the previous incidents of cruelty, if any. What kind of quarrels used to take place, there is nothing on record. There is no evidence on record as to nature of previous incidents is not in dispute. Thus, on the date of incident petty altercation had taken place due to the fact that the deceased had put the soil at the place where the cows used to be tied which was objected to by the mother-in-law. This stray incident could not be termed to be of such a nature so as to drive to life, limb or health. It appears that mother-in-law wanted to pour kerosene oil on herself during the course of altercation and in that process accidentally the kerosene oil was sprinkled on the deceased and she had caught accidental fire as stated by her. Case of suicide has not been found to be established. Considering the dying declarations and absence of other evidence, it could not be said to be a case covered under section 498A IPC. Thus, the appellant is acquitted of the offence punishable under section 498A IPC. 8. Resultantly, the appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment of conviction and sentence imposed under section 498A IPC of 2 years 5.1. and fine of Rs. 1,000/- is hereby set aside. The appellant is acquitted of the charge. She is on bail, her bail bonds stand discharged.