GEETA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal on behalf of the appellants Geeta and Dropti, who are daughter and mother respectively, is directed against the judgment dated 14.09.1993 delivered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi whereby the appellant Dropti has been found guilty of having committed the offence of murder of her son-in-law Madan Lal, punishable under Section 302 IPC and appellant Geeta was found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 109 IPC for having assisted her mother, appellant Dropti and another Ghanshyam (who has been declared to be a proclaimed offender), in the said murder of her husband Madan Lal. They were both convicted primarily on the basis of Exhibit PW10/A which was accepted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge as the true and correct dying declaration made by the deceased Madan Lal. By a separate order dated 27.09.1993 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, the appellants were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs 5,000/- each and, in default thereof, they were required to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months each. The appellants are aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order on sentence and have preferred this appeal.

(2.) AT the outset, it may be pointed out that initially there were three accused, namely, Geeta (wife of the deceased Madan Lal), Smt. Dropti (mother-in-law of the deceased) and one Ghanshyam, who is said to have arranged the marriage between Geeta and Madan Lal and also to have participated in the murder of Madan Lal on 28.12.1987 at about 10:30 am at Durga Temple, C-Block, Vikas Puri, Delhi. However, the impugned judgment and order on sentence relates only to the appellants Geeta and Dropti inasmuch as Ghanshyam had gone missing after having been granted bail during the trial and consequently, he had been declared to be a proclaimed offender.

(3.) ON the basis of the said statement Exhibit PW10/A, Sub-Inspector Raj Singh got a case registered under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC, through Constable Satbir Singh at Vikas Puri Police Station vide FIR No. 350 dated 28.12.1987 at 1:40 pm. On the same day, at about 1:30 pm, Sub-Inspector Raj Singh got the scene of occurrence photographed and prepared a rough site plan. Subsequently, a site plan to scale was also prepared through a draughtsman. However, on 28.12.1987, Sub-Inspector Raj Singh took into his possession, from the scene of occurrence, one dented plastic can of five litres capacity, containing some kerosene oil in it. He also took into his possession one match box having a few match sticks and two burnt sticks, a few pieces of burnt clothing, one cotton mattress (gadda) and one bed sheet, both of which were slightly burnt, some sand smelling of kerosene oil and one brass lock of "Harrison " make, which indicated that attempts of breaking it had been made on it. The said lock was in an unlocked condition.