9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (1) TMI 743X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of ₹ 1,000/- and in default to undergo six months' simple imprisonment. Under Section 498A IPC, the respondent was sentenced to undergo two years' rigorous imprisonment. As noticed earlier, the High Court set aside the aforesaid Judgment and Order of the Sessions Judge. 2. An occurrence is said to have taken place in the morning of 22nd November, 1993. The case of the prosecution is that the respondent strangulated to death his wife Veena and thereafter set her on fire along with her infant child aged a year and a half. The respondent himself reported the matter to the local police making it appear that the deceased and her child had died in an accidental fire, but the post mortem disclosed that Veena had died of throttling and not on account of burn injuries suffered by her. 3. The facts of the case may be briefly noticed. 4. The deceased Veena was the daughter of Laxmamma (PW1) and was married to the respondent on June 3, 1991. Laxmamma (PW1) is a resident of Shimoga while the respondent at the time of his marriage was a resident of Gundlupet. A male child was born to the coupl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bodies of Veena and her child. He also seized a plastic can lying nearby which contained some quantity of kerosene oil. 6. The post-mortem examination of the dead body of the deceased and the child was conducted by Dr. Munyyal (PW26) and another doctor namely Dr. Chavarad (not examined) on 23.11.1993 between 10.00 A.M. and 12.30 P.M. and 12.45 P.M. and 3.00 P.M. respectively, The post-mortem reports are Exhibit P-5 and P-6. According to the post-mortem report of Veena (deceased) Exhibit P-5, her body was burnt completely except back and buttocks and both the lower limbs below knee joints. On internal examination, it was found that the cornea of hyoid bone was fractured. The examination of the Larynx and Trachea disclosed that in the lumen of the trachea and bronchus carbon particles were not present. Both the lungs were shrunken and pale. The time of the death was estimated to be between 16 and 36 hours. The doctor further certified that after careful examination both external and internal of the dead body the cause of death was found to be asphyxia due to throttling. 7. In the case of her child the cause of death was found to be shock due to burns. 8. The prosecution exam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the deceased herself. PW5 also deposed that he was told by the deceased that she was being ill treated by the respondent and that he was asking her to get ₹ 10,000/- from her mother. Later on, he was pressing the deceased to bring a sum of ₹ 1,00,000/-. PW11, the younger sister of the deceased namely Vijaya, stated that few months before the occurrence when she was in Bangalore, the respondent had made a telephone call and had demanded ₹ 25,000/-. PW12 deposed that he did not know exactly what amount was demanded, but the deceased had complained to him about the harassment meted out to her by her husband and the constant demand of money made by her husband, PW13 deposed that when the respondent and the deceased were going to Nesargi, PW2, brother of the deceased went to see them off at the bus stand. At that time a request was made to the Respondent to attend the marriage of Vijaya (PW11) but in reply he retorted that he will send the dead body of the deceased. No doubt, PW2 does not narrate these facts, but has stated that on that occasion the respondent had demanded a sum of ₹ 10,000/-. In fact, he was also told by his sister Veena (deceased) that the res ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In any event this is not a good enough reason to reject the testimony of such a large number of witnesses who have deposed on this aspect of the case. 13. Another reason given by the High Court is that in Exhibit D-3 a letter written by the deceased to her husband quite sometime back, there is no mention of any ill treatment meted out to her by the respondent, and that no other letter has been produced to show that she had even mentioned in any such letter that she was being ill treated. This approach of the High Court is again highly unreasonable. Merely because in one of the letters written to her husband she had not complained about ill treatment, is no ground to hold that she was never ill treated. We have read that letter from which it appears that it was one of those letters written by her in which there is no reference to bitterness in their marital life. However, it is not expected that in every letter that a wife writes to her husband, she must complain to him about his ill treatment. Merely, because in one solitary letter there is no reference to ill treatment by the respondent, would be no ground to arrive at the conclusion that she was never ill treated by her husba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of asphyxia caused by throttling, the High Court over emphasised that one part of a statement made by the doctor that the throttling of the neck could have been done by using a rope, or by any forceful action on the neck like pressing. The High Court completely ignored the latter part of the opinion, and proceeded to examine the evidence as if in the opinion of the doctor throttling could be caused only with the aid of a rope. The High Court referred to the evidence on record and found that there was no evidence to prove that the deceased had been strangulated with a rope. There is no evidence to prove that a rope was found anywhere near the place of occurrence. It rejected the evidence of PW2, the brother of the deceased who had stated that he had seen a nylon rope lying nearby. It, therefore, reached the conclusion that the prosecution case was not consistent with the medical evidence on record, because no rope was found which could substantiate the prosecution case that she had been strangulated with a rope. The High Court lost sight of the fact that there was no eye-witness of the occurrence. The medical evidence on record disclosed that there was a fracture of the hyoid bone o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctor observing that there was no corroboration front surrounding circumstances, completely ignoring the findings of the doctor which we have discussed above. 16. The High Court then discussed some discrepancy about two types of reports having been recorded in the police station. We have considered the material on record and we find that there may have been some confusion about the recording of the case in the police station because earlier an oral report had been made and later a written report was made and therefore, initially a case was registered as UDR 27/93 and another Case being Cr.No. 120/93 was registered later when it came to light that it was not a case of accidental fire but a case of murder, and only to destroy the evidence the deceased was set on fire. 17. The High Court has also made much of the fact that one of the daughters of Laxmamma (PW1) who was residing at Bangalore and who was the person who had telephonically informed her friends and relatives about the death of the deceased, was not examined as a witness in this case. It does appear from the evidence that she had made calls to her family members and told them that the deceased and her child had sustain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
