KRISHNA CHANDRA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Krishna Chandra and his mother, Smt. Chandra Kala, residents of village Bargaon, Police-Station Kotwali Nagar, Gonda were placed on trial before the Special/Addl. Sessions Judge, Gonda in connection with charges under Sections 304-B, I.P.C. and 498-A, I.P.C as also under S. 302 read with S. 34 I.P.C., for the murder of Smt. Indra Kumari in the itervening night of 19/20-7-1987. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge by means of his judgement and order dated 31-3-1989, acquitted both of them on the charge u/S. 304-B, I.P.C., but convicted them u/S. 498-A, I.P.C. and sentenced each of them to undergo one year's R.I., and pay a fine of Rs. 500.00 and in default to undergo six months R.I. Both of them were also convicted u/S. 302 read with S. 34, I.P.C., and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment. However, the sentences were made to run concurrently. Against their conviction and sentence, Krishna Chandra and Smt. Chandra Kala preferred appeals separately. Both these appeals have been heard together and since they arise out of the same judgement and order, they are being disposed of by a common judgement.

(2.) Briefly stated, the case for prosecution as unfolded during trial is as follows; Smt. Indra Kumari (deceased) was the daughter of Babu Lal P.W. 2 and she was married to appellant Krishna Chandra in the years 1980. At the time of marriage, appellant Krishna Chandra was studying in High School while he had joined L.L.B. classes near about the incident. In the month of February, 1987 Indra Kumari had visited her parents house and she had told them that the appellants were demanding a motor-cycle and in case it was not delivered, they would leave her. Babu Lal visited the in-laws' house of his daughter, Indra Kumari on 16-7-87 and his daughter again told him that appellants were demanding motor-cycle. Babu Lal told the appellants that he was not in a position to provide motor-cycle. In the morning of 20-7-87, Bhagwati and Radhey Shyam went to the house of Babu Lal and told him that his daughter got burnt and admitted in the hospital. Thereupon Babu Lal and his son, Chandrika Prasad went to the hospital and found Indra Kumari severely burnt. On enquiry she told them that the appellants had beaten her and set her on fire after sprinkling kerosene oil, on the score of motor-cycle. She further told them that the Magistrate had recorded her statement. Babu Lal prepared a written report and lodged the same at P. S. Kotwali Nagar, district Gonda at 11.05 a.m. on the very same day. A case under Sections 498-A and 307, I.P.C. was registered on the basis of the written-report against the appellants and investigation followed. Indra Kumari, however, succumbed to the burn injuries at 3.30 p.m. on 20-7-1987. The crime was altered to one u/Ss. 304-B and 498-A, I.P.C. After completing the investigation, a charge-sheet for prosecution of the appellants under Section 304-B and 498-A, I.P.C. was submitted by the Investigating Officer. The case was committed to the Court of Session by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gonda on 9-2-1988. Learned Addl. Sessions framed charges against the appellants under Sections 304-B and 498-A, I.P.C. and also framed a charge under Section 302 read with Section 34, I.P.C., against both of them. The appellants pleaded not guilty to the charges and claimed trial.

(3.) In support of its case, the prosecution in all examined thirteen witnesses. Munna Lal, P.W. 1 is a neighbour of appellant Krishna Chandra. He did not support the prosecution case but he was not declared hostile.Babu Lal P.W. 2 in the complainant of the case and father of deceased Indra Kumari. He supported the prosecution case and proved the written-report Ext. Ka-1.Chandrika Prasad P.W. 3 is the son of the complainant and brother of the deceased. He also supported the prosecution case.Dr. S. N. Leley P.W. 4 examined the deceased at 4.30 a.m. after she was admitted in the hospital with burn injuries. He found superficial to deep burn injuries all over the body of the victim except scalp and soles of both feet. She was in unconscious condition and her pulse and blood pressure were not recordable. She was put under treatment in the Emergency Ward. He proved the bed-head ticket Ext. Ka-3.Dr. K. K. Chakrawarti P.W. 5 conducted the autopsy on the deadbody of Indra Kumari at 3.50 p.m. on 21-7-1987. According to him. Indra Kumari died due to shock as a result of ante-mortem burns. He proved the post-mortem examination report Ext. Ka-4.Head Constable Gauri Shankar Yadav P.W. 6 was examined to prove Chik report prepared on the basis of written-report of Babu Lal and registration of crime in the General Diary.Head Constable Kaushal Kishor Mishra P.W. 7 was examined to prove alteration of crime from Sections 307 and 498-A I.P.C. to Sections 304-B and 498-A, I.P.C., on the basis of intimation of death of Indra Kumari at 3.30 p.m.Constable Phool Chandra Shukla P.W. 8 was examined to say that he had carried the deadbody of Indra Kumari in a sealed condition to the mortuary for post-mortem examination.Dr. B. P. Srivastava P.W. 9 was examined to say that he had certified, before the dying declaration of Indra Kumari was recorded by the Magistrate on 20-7-1987 at 8.50 a.m. that she was fully conscious and fit to make a dying declaration.S. I. Dhannanjai Singh P.W. 10 was examined to prove the initial investigation done in the case.Sri Sheo Shanker Srivastava P.W. 11 was posted as Naib-Tehsildar, Gonda and was Executive Magistrate III Class. He was examined to prove the dying declaration of Indra Kumari, Ext. Ka-11. According to him, he had recorded the dying declaration after the doctor had certified that she was in a fit state condition of mind to give her statement.S.S.I Sri R. S. Bhagat P.W. 12 was examined to prove the various steps taken by the Investigating Officer, I. P. Chandra, Circle Officer. In fact, his evidence regarding the investigation made by the Circle Officer, I. P. Chandra is of no use particularly when I. P. Chandra turned up to give his own evidence.Sri. I. P. Chandra P.W. 13 was the Circle Officer in district Gonda during the material period. He carried out the investigation of this case and proved the various steps taken by him during investigation. He submitted the charge-sheet Ext. Ka-14 for the prosecution of the appellants.