Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 656 (PNJ)

Ravinderjit Singh v. State Of Punjab

2020-02-19

HARINDER SINGH SIDHU, RAJIV SHARMA

body2020
JUDGMENT Rajiv Sharma, J. - This appeal has been instituted against the judgment and order dated 10.03.2005 rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur, in Sessions case no.2/RBT 41 of 2001/2004, whereby the appellant was charged with and tried for the offences punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC') and in the alternative under Section 304-B and 498-A IPC. The appellant was convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. 2. The case of the prosecution in a nutshell is that on 21.09.2001 a chit was received by the MHC P.S. Kotli Surat Malhi from the doctor that Satwinder Kaur wife of Ravinderjit Singh son of Khazan Singh of village Bhagwanpur was admitted in Civil Hospital, Batala with burn injuries. ASIPunjab Singh along with other police officials went to Civil Hospital, Batala. He came to know that Satwinder Kaur was taken to Amritsar. On that day, a wireless message was received from control room that Satwinder Kaur was admitted to Muni Lal Chopra Memorial Hospital, Amritsar with burn injuries. ASI Punjab Singh along with police officials went to the hospital at Amritsar. He moved an application to seek the opinion of doctor whether the injured was fit to make statement. The doctor opined that she was fit to make statement. Thereafter, ASI recorded the statement of Satwinder Kaur. She stated that she was married to Ravinderjit Singh resident of village Bhagwanpur about 3/4 years back. Her mother Kashmir Kaur gave dowry as per her capacity. However, the accused used to harass her for bringing more dowry. On 20.09.2001 at about 9.00 P.M. her husband Ravinderjit Singh came to his house after taking liquor. He started harassing her. She telephonically contacted her mother Kashmir Kaur. She asked her to come to her house as her husband was harassing her. Kashmir Kaur reached Satwinder Kaur's house at about 10.00 P.M. Ravinderjit Singh again insisted for demand of dowry. Her mother advised him not to insist for dowry. The accused became angry. He went to kitchen. He brought one can containing kerosene. He poured the kerosene upon her. Thereafter, he set her ablaze with a match box. She received burn injuries. Kashmir Kaur reached Satwinder Kaur's house at about 10.00 P.M. Ravinderjit Singh again insisted for demand of dowry. Her mother advised him not to insist for dowry. The accused became angry. He went to kitchen. He brought one can containing kerosene. He poured the kerosene upon her. Thereafter, he set her ablaze with a match box. She received burn injuries. Kashmir Kaur raised alarm. She arranged for conveyance. She got her admitted in Civil Hospital, Batala. Thereafter, she was removed to Muni Lal Chopra Memorial Hospital, Amritsar. Satwinder Kaur died on 30.09.2001. The postmortem was conducted. Investigation was completed. Challan was put up after completing all the codal formalities. 3. The prosecution examined a number of witnesses. Statement of the appellant was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. He denied the case of prosecution. The appellant examined two witnesses in his defence. The appellant was convicted and sentenced, as noticed hereinabove. Hence, this appeal. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has vehemently argued that the prosecution has failed to prove the case against the appellant. 5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has supported the prosecution case. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the judgment and record very carefully. 7. PW-1 Dr. Raminder testified that on 22.09.2001 he was posted at Muni Lal Chopra Memorial Hospital, Amritsar. Satwinder Kaur was admitted in the hospital with 90% burns. Her condition was serious. However, she was conscious. Her statement Ex.PA was recorded by ASI Punjab Singh in his presence and in the presence of Dr.Jatinder Singh. ASI recorded her statement in verbatim. 8. PW-2 Dr. K.S. Bawa conducted the post-mortem examination. He noticed the following injuries on the dead body:- "1. Superficial to deep burns all over the body except sole of both feeth, perineum back spared on left side. Singing of hair present. Whitish Pus discharge present over wounds." The cause of death in his opinion was septicemia due to injuries described which were ante mortem in nature and sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. 9. PW-6 Dr.Alok Lal Lalwanie deposed that Satwinder Kaur was admitted in the hospital on 25.09.2001 with burn injuries. She died on 30.09.2001. 10. Whitish Pus discharge present over wounds." The cause of death in his opinion was septicemia due to injuries described which were ante mortem in nature and sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. 9. PW-6 Dr.Alok Lal Lalwanie deposed that Satwinder Kaur was admitted in the hospital on 25.09.2001 with burn injuries. She died on 30.09.2001. 10. PW-3 Kashmir Kaur deposed that on 20.09.2001 she received a telephone call of her daughter Satwinder Kaur at 9.00 P.M. Her daughter told her that she was being harassed by the accused. She requested her to come. Since accused was demanding dowry, she and her daughter Rajwinder Kaur immediately went to the house of Satwinder Kaur at village Bhagwanpura. The deceased again told them about the demand of accused. In the meantime, accused in a drunkard condition came there. He started beating her daughter. When she intervened, accused pushed her. Accused brought a can containing kerosene and poured it on Satwinder Kaur. He set her ablaze with a match box. Satwinder Kaur raised hue and cry. Accused ran away from the spot. People reached there. Injured was taken to the hospital. 11. PW-5 Rajwinder Kaur corroborated the statement of PW-3 Kashmir Kaur with regard to the manner in which the accused had set Satwinder Kaur on fire. In her cross-examination, she deposed that after the marriage the relations between her sister and the accused remained cordial for about two months. She did not try to put off the fire. Her mother made efforts but accused pushed her. 12. PW-7 ASI Punjab Singh deposed that he along with police party reached Muni Lal Chopra Memorial Hospital, Amritsar, on 22.09.2001. He obtained the opinion of the medical officer regarding fitness of Satwinder Kaur. The police request was Ex.PG. The opinion of themedical officer was Ex.PG/1. Thereafter, he recorded the statement of Satwinder Kaur. The contents were read over and explained to her. She signed the same after admitting the same to be correct. It was attested by Dr. Raminder. He made endorsement on the statement Ex.PA/1 and sent it for registration of the case. FIR Ex.PA/2 was recorded. He prepared rough site plan by visiting the spot. The dead body was identified by Surjit Singh and Karnail Singh. The dead body was sent for post-mortem examination. 13. It was attested by Dr. Raminder. He made endorsement on the statement Ex.PA/1 and sent it for registration of the case. FIR Ex.PA/2 was recorded. He prepared rough site plan by visiting the spot. The dead body was identified by Surjit Singh and Karnail Singh. The dead body was sent for post-mortem examination. 13. DW-1 Dr.H.S. Bhatia deposed that on 06.10.2001 when he was posted as Surgical Specialist at Civil Hospital, Gurdaspur, Ravinder Singh was referred from Central Jail, Gurdaspur to Emergency Department of Civil Hospital, Gurdaspur. He was attended by the Emergency Medical Officer Dr.Vijay Kumar. Thereafter, he was shifted to Surgical Ward for further treatment. He had brought the bed head ticket of the patient Ex.DX. The patient remained admitted from 06.10.2001 to 16.10.2001. The patient was having old burns infected wounds. In his cross-examination, he admitted that the history of the patient was not entered in the B.H.T. regarding the receipt of injuries nor the manner in which the injuries were received. The patient also did not tell whether he was earlier treated for these injuries or not. 14. What emerges from the statements discussed hereinabove is that accused was married with Satwinder Kaur about 3Yi years back before the incident. The incident had taken place on 20.09.2001. PW-3 Kashmir Kaur and PW-5 Rajwinder Kaur had seen the accused putting Satwinder Kaur on fire by pouring kerosene on her. PW-1 Dr. Raminder has categorically deposed that the deceased was admitted in the hospital on 22.09.2001 with 90% burns. Her condition was serious. Her statement was recorded vide Ex.PA by ASI Punjab Singh. It was recorded in his presence as well as in the presence of Dr.Jatinder Singh. He had signed the same. Statement was signed by Dr.Jatinder Singh also. ASI recorded the statement as per the version given by the injured. The cause of death as per the opinion of PW-2 Dr.K.S. Bawa was septicemia due to injuries described which were ante mortem in nature and sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. The deceased had received 90% burns. PW-7 ASI Punjab Singh deposed that he went to the hospital. He moved an application vide Ex.PG seeking opinion of the medical officer. The medical officer gave opinion Ex.PG/1. Thereafter, he recorded the statement of Satwinder Kaur Ex.PA. The contents of the same were read over and explained to her. She signed the same. The deceased had received 90% burns. PW-7 ASI Punjab Singh deposed that he went to the hospital. He moved an application vide Ex.PG seeking opinion of the medical officer. The medical officer gave opinion Ex.PG/1. Thereafter, he recorded the statement of Satwinder Kaur Ex.PA. The contents of the same were read over and explained to her. She signed the same. It was attested by Dr.Raminder. He sent the same to the police station on the basis of which FIR Ex.PA/2 was registered. PW-7 ASI Punjab Singh in his cross-examination categorically deposed that it has not come to his notice that accused had received burn injuries while putting Satwinder Kaur on fire. According to the appellant, it was accidental case. 15. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has vehemently argued that the deceased received burn injuries when she was cooking meals. This version cannot be believed in view of the categorical ocular as well as medical evidence. The appellant has also relied upon the statement of DW-1 Dr. H.S. Bhatia. In case the accused had received burn injuries while putting off the deceased on fire, he should have taken treatment immediately on 20.09.2001, instead of 06.10.2001. This is after almost 16 days. Thus, the plea taken by the appellant that he also tried to put off the fire is not believable. The prosecution has proved the case against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. 16. Accordingly, there is no merit in the appeal and the same is dismissed. The appellant is on bail. His bail bond and surety bond are cancelled. The police is directed to take him into custody to undergo remaining sentence imposed by the learned trial Court.