MUBARACK Vs. STATE BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants/accused 1,2,5 stand convicted for the offences under Section 306 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years each and to pay a fine of RS 5000/- each in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one year each and the appellants stand convicted for the offence under Section 509 IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year each and to pay a fine of RS 1,000/- each in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months each and the said sentences were ordered to run concurrently by the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Coimbatore in S.C. No. 205 of 2003 dated 8.3.2004. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellants have come forward with the present appeal.

(2.) THE prosecution case is as follows: P.Ws.l and 2 are the parents of the deceased. THE deceased Pathymuthu was married to one Akbar Ali eight years before. Though they lived together as husband and wife for some time and subsequently, due to misunderstanding, she came out of the matrimonial home and started living along with P.Ws.l and 2 at Coimbatore. It appears that there were some attempts made to unite them which ended in futile. THE accused in this case belong to the same locality. On 18.12.2003, at about 11.00 p.m., while P. W. 1 was taking water in a nearby water tap, A-2 appeared and wanted P.W.I to call the deceased for an enquiry. P.W.I declined to do so stating that a Muslim woman could not be called in such an odd hour for an enquiry. However, A-2 pressurized her to call the deceased. While the said transaction was going on, A-3, A-4 and A-5 also came to the spot. THEy joined with A-2 and demanded that the deceased should be called for the purpose of an enquiry. Due to the same, P.W. 1 went to her house and brought the deceased to the place where these accused were standing. At that time, A-2 asked the deceased as to whether she had illicit intimacy with A-l by name Mr. Mubarack. She answered in the negative. THEn A-2 asked A-5 to bring A-l to the spot. Shortly, thereafter, A-5 brought A-1 to the place of occurrence. In the presence of deceased and P.Ws.l and 2, A-2 asked A-1 as to whether he had illicit intimacy with the deceased. A-l answered in the affirmative. On hearing the same, the deceased started crying denying the said statement. THE other accused viz., A-6, A-7 and A-8 also joined with the other accused. THE deceased told them that the said statement made by A-1 was false and that she had no illicit intimacy with A-1 at all. After this conversation, the deceased rushed to her house. P.W.I followed her. But P.W. 1 could not find the deceased. THE children at home told P.W.I that the deceased had gone to upstairs. P.W.I, therefore, rushed to the upstairs of the house. To her shock, she found the deceased hanging by using her shawl from the wooden beam. P.W.I tried to help the deceased. THE people from neighbourhood were also attracted by the same. THE deceased was removed from knot and rushed to the hospital. But the Doctor dedared her dead. THEreafter, P.W.I proceeded to the police station on the next day i.e. on 19.12.2003 morning at 6.00 a.m. and preferred a complaint.

(3.) EXHIBIT P-15 is the post mortem certificate. He forwarded the viscera for chemical examination. EXHIBIT P-6 is the chemical analysis report. He opined that the deceased died due to suicidal hanging. EXHIBIT P-7 is the final opinion. On completing the investigation, P.W.9 laid final report. On committal, the case was tried by the Special Judge, Court for women in Sessions Case No. 205 of 2003.