SANJAY DALMIA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FIVE persons were tried in S. C. No. 377/01 on the file of the Court of Mahalir Neethi Mandram at Chennai under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and Sections 4 and 6 (2) of the Dowry Prohibition Act. At the end of the trial, the learned trial Judge found A-1 to A-3 alone guilty of the above referred to offences and, accordingly, sentenced A-1 to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence under Section 304-B IPC and A-2 and A-3 each to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years for the same offence. No separate sentence was awarded for the offence under Section 498-A IPC and Sections 4 and 6 (2) of the Dowry Prohibition Act. In addition to the above, A-1 to A-3 were directed to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000/= each as compensation to P. W. 1 and a sum of rs. 50,000/= each as compensation to the minor child, Piyush Dalmia. The compensation amount, to be paid to the minor, was directed to be invested in a nationalised bank till the minor attains majority. A-1 to A-3 are therefore challenging their conviction before this Court in this appeal. Challenging the acquittal of A-5, P. W. 1 in that sessions case is before this Court in the accompanying revision. The State had not challenged the acquittal of A-4 and a-5 in the judgment under challenge. Heard Mr. Sanjay Ramasamy, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and for the contesting respondent in the revision against acquittal; Mr. N. R. Elango, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor appearing for the State in both the cases and Mr. S. Ananthanarayanan, learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner.

(2.) THE prosecution case is that between 22. 1. 99 and 30. 1. 01, the accused subjected Archana, since deceased, to cruelty; made demand for dowry and unable to bear the torture, Archana committed suicide and, therefore, punishable under Sections 498-A and 304-B IPC and Sections 4 and 6 (2) of the Dowry Prohibition Act. To substantiate their case, the prosecution examined P. W. s 1 to 28 besides marking Exs. P-1 to P-62 and M. O. s 1 to 10. THE defence examined one witness on their side as D. W. 1 and marked Ex. D-1. C. W. 1 was examined as a court witness through whom Exs. C-1 to C-3 came to be marked.

(3.) P. W. 27 continued his examination further by examining witnesses and recording their statements. As the occurrence place comes within the jurisdiction of Tahsildar, Egmore-Nungambakkam, a request given by him to the Madras District Collector for conducting an enquiry was forwarded to the said Tahsildar (examined in this case as P. W. 23 ). P. W. 24 is the scientific officer. As per the directions of his higher officers, he reached the crime scene at about 7. 00 p. m. on 2. 2. 01. As it was dark at that time disabling him from collecting any incriminating objects from the scene, he decided to postpone his inspection to the next day and, accordingly, he inspected the place at 8. 00 a. m. on 3. 2. 01. He collected several incriminating objects from the crime scene, namely, M. O. 5, a broken glass bangle; a paper cover, M. O. 4; a partly burnt paper piece; a fully burnt matchstick and a cover, M. O. 9. From the paper cover; from the parapet wall in the open terrace; from the place east of the parapet well and from the place where Archana would have died, he removed bloodstains with cotton swabs. Then by using cotton swab procedure, he recovered bloodstains noted by him on the plywood door leading to the open terrace; from the open terrace floor and from the plastic ropes (yellow and green colour); blood sample from A-5, who is stated to have helped the victim and then handed over the same to the Asst. Commissioner of Police for their onward journey to the laboratory. P. W. 27 continued his investigation. On 2. 2. 01 p. W. 22 (the doctor, who did post-mortem) inspected the crime scene and then examined A-5, who was admitted as in-patient in SRM Hospital. P. W. 27 would state that he sent for the services of P. W. 24 to assist him in his investigation and we have already referred to the oral evidence of P. W. 24. The incrimination objects recovered by P. W. 24 from the crime scene and handed over to P. W. 27 were sent by him to the forensic laboratory through the inquest tahsildar. Ex. P-53 is the said requisition. P. W. 27 caused blood samples to be taken from A-5 through P. W. 24. Further witnesses were examined by P. W. 27 by recording their statements. He sent all the case properties recovered in this case to the laboratory for chemical examination. By examining the employees of airtel (mobile service provider) he verified the duration of certain outgoing calls stated to have been made by A-5 to her fiancee (would-be husband ). He collected the post-mortem report from P. W. 23 and as the post-mortem report disclosed internal injuries on the head of Archana, and since drops of blood were noticed in several places in the crime scene and witnesses have stated that archana, before her death, was subjected to cruelty, he altered the section of offence from one under Section 174 Cr. P. C. into one under Sections 302 and 498-A IPC. Ex. P-54 is the altered express first information report. The alteration is also on the basis of the statement made by the doctor, who did post-mortem. At 2. 00 p. m. on 19. 2. 01 he arrested A-1 and then sent him for judicial remand. On 22. 2. 01 he sent the post-mortem report to the court. He examined further witnesses by recording their statements. On 27. 2. 01 he arrested A-2 to A-5 from their residence at West Mambalam and then sent them for judicial remand. Pursuant to the orders obtained by P. W. 1 and another in the High Court by filing O. P. Nos. 2656/01 and 3279/01 and as per the directions of the Director General of Police, the investigation was transferred to the Crime Branch CID, Greater Chennai and, accordingly, he handed over the entire case diary to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Crime Branch CID, chennai. Exs. P-55 to P-59 are the reports received from the forensic laboratory on 15. 2. 01, 23. 2. 01, 1. 3. 01 and 12. 3. 01. M. O. 9 was recovered under Ex. P-47.