HANUMANT KARBHARI KARALE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal filed by the appellant, original accused Hanumant karbhari Karale (hereinafter referred to as "the accused") , impugns ajudgment and order dated 28-2-2000 passed by the learned IIIrd additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar, in sessions Case No. 220 of 1999, convicting the accused for an offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life.

(2.) The brief facts of the prosecution case were as under : (a) Deceased Ranjana Bhima Kadam, who was a widow, was working as a Peon in the milk dairy run by Ahmednagar District co-operative Milk Society. Her husband Bhima had expired about five years prior to the incident which occurred on 10-8-1999. She was residing in a residential area known as "bhutkar Wadi" Bhingardive mala in ahmednagar town. Her three children were (i) PW 5 - Avinash alias Malhan, aged 13 years, (ii) Sachin and (iii) Sunny. The accused hanumant was also working as Peon on the same milk dairy where the deceased used to work. The accused and the deceased developed an illicit relationship. About 7 to 8 months prior to the incident deceased Ranjana gave an amount of Rs 50,000/- to the accused on his request, by way of hand loan for purchasing a motor cycle. After some days, she started demanding back this amount but the accused was not returning the same to her. There was disagreement regarding non-refund of the aforesaid amount by the accused to the deceased. (b) The incident in question took place at about 2.30 pm on 10-8-1999. On that day at about 2.30 pm the accused Hanumant came to the house of Ranjana. On his arrival Ranjana asked him to return her money. This resulted in a quarrel between the two and the accused told her that he would not return her money and she may do whatever she wants. After saying so, the accused poured kerosene from a tin lying in the house on the body of deceased ranjana, thereafter removed a match box from his pocket and set her on fire with a match stick. Ranjana started screaming loudly. The accused then put out the fire with the help of a Chadar which was lying there and ran away from the house. The neighbours gathered there and some one amongst them sent for her nephew vijay Kadam who was a young boy aged 13 years. Vijay was called for from his school. At about 3 pm. Avinash son of the deceased also came back from the school for lunch and found his mother lying in a burnt condition. By this time about 8/9 people from the locality had gathered there. Deceased Ranjana told avinash that the accused who used to deliver milk at their house, had poured kerosene on her body, set her on fire and run away. Thereafter, Avinash and Vijay put the deceased in a rickshaw and took her to the Civil Hospital at Ahmednagar (c) The case papers indicate that the deceased was brought to the civil hospital at about 3.30 pm on 10-8-1999. The hospital record indicates that at about 3.30 pm, a clinical note was made recording the history of the incident as accidental burns. (d) The evidence indicates that this history was recorded by PW 8 Dr. Mohan shankar Gavai who was then working as incharge Doctor at the Civil Hospital at ahmednagar. This entry further indicates that ranjana was brought to the hospital by her son avinash alias Malhan (PW 4). After about 5 to 10 minutes after deceased being brought to the hospital, her husband's brother Laxman and his son Raosaheb also came to the hospital. (e) The case papers further indicate that at about 4.20 pm. on that day, Vijay Kadamnephew of the deceased - was informed that the condition of Ranjana was serious. His signature was taken on the case papers below an endorsement that if anything happened to her he would not have any grievance. At about 4.20 pm an injection of Phenargan was admittedly admimstered to Ranjana. Dr. Mohan Gavai has admitted in his evidence that this injetion was a sedative as well as a pain killer and the effect of this injection would remain for about six hours. (f) The record indicates that Raosaheb kadam went to meet Rajesh - brother of the deceased and met him at about 5 pm. He informed Rajesh that his sister Ranjana had sustained burn injuries and admitted in the Civil hospital at Ahmednagar. PW 4 Rajesh went to the civil hospital, Ahmednagar. He reached the said hospital at about 5.15 pm. Deceased ranjana made an oral dying declaration to her brother Rajesh informing him that Hanumant karale who used to deliver milk had been given rs. 50,000/- by her some 5-6 months for purchasing motor-cycle. When she had asked he accused to return the amount the accused had flatly refused, abused her, had poured kerosene on her body from a tin and told that he would finish her permanently. He had then ignited a match stick and set her on fire. Thereafter, he tried to extinguish the fire with a chadar lying there in order to save her. She had raised a hue and cry and on her shouting the neighbours gathered there. Thereafter the accused Hanumant ran away from the spot. (g) At about 6.30 pm, a Ward doctor, who has been examined by the prosecution again recorded in the case papers a history of the accidental burns by explosion of a stove. This entry also records that the general condition of the deceased had become low though she was conscious and oriented, her pulse being 102. (h) The record indicates that in the meanwhile the police had also arrived at the hospital within about 10 minutes of Ranjana being brought to the hospital. Police Station officer Bhabhal gave written directions to PW 9 Shivaji Natha Sathey, Police Head Constable, asking him to record the dying declaration of ranjana. Sathe addressed a letter (Exhibit 21) to the Executive Magistrate PW 6 Ashok vithalrao Bhor. This letter was written by sathe at 7.45 p. m. In this letter, there is no mention of the fact that the accused had caused burn injuries on the body of Ranjana. (i) At about 8 pm the Special Executive magistrate PW 6 Ashok Bhor arrived at the hospital. He met PW 8 Dr. Mohan Gavai and showed him the letter issued to him by the police (Exhibit 21). Dr. Mohan examined ranjana and told Ashok Bhor (PW 6) that she was in a condition to give statement. Dr. Gavai made an endorsement to this effect in the case papers. The Executive Magistrate Ashok then started recording the statement of Ranjana. He asked her few questions in question and answer form. Thereafter, he asked her as to what had happened, to which Ranjana informed him that the accused was known to her, she had given a handloan of Rs. 50,000/- to the accused, she had illicit relations with the accused that on 10-8-1999 at about 2.30 pm the accused came to her house, she demanded her money and due to this reason a quairel resulted. The accused told her that he would not return her money and she may do whatever she wanted. Saying so, he had poured kerosene on her body and set her on fire with a match stick. He had thereafter run away from the spot. According to the Executive Magistrate Ashok, while he was recording the statement of deceased, Dr. Gavai had gone on his rounds. He completed recording of the statement of Ranjana by about 8.30 pm. By that time Dr. Gavai came back and again examined the deceased and made a second endorsement on the dying declaration noting that the patient was conscious. The case papers indicates that Dr. Gavai made an endorsement at 8.35 pm in the case papers to the effect that the patient was conscious while giving the statement. The Executive Magistrate obtained a thumb impression of the deceased below her dying declaration though he did not attest the same. (j) At 8.45 pm, on 10-8-1999, PW 10 jyoti Karandikar, Police Sub-Inspector attached to Topkhana Police Station, was contacted by the Police Head Constable alongwith the dying declaration recorded by pw 6 Ashok Bhor. PSI Jyoti read the dying declaration. Thereafter, she alongwith her writer Constable went to the civil hospital, ahmednagar and met Ranjana in the burns ward. PSI Jyoti made inquiry with Ranjana as she found her to be conscious and recorded her statement. The statement was written by the writer Constable as per the version of ranjana. PSI Jyoti read out her statement to the deceased and thereafter obtained a thumb impression of the deceased on her statement. The statement was also signed by PSI Jyoti. She then returned to the police station and registered Crime No. 165 of 1999 for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. She then commenced the investigation. (k) On 11-8-1999 PSI Jyoti visited the scene of the offence and drew a spot panchanama. The record indicates that the said panchanama was drawn between 7 am and 8 am and as many as five objects were seized from the scene. These articles were (i) pieces of burnt saree and petticoat, (ii) green-coloured kerosene tin, (iii) broken steel internal container of a pressure cooker emitting strong odour, (iv) one chadar and (v) two burnt pieces of match stick. The panchanama further indicated that on the floor one iron stove was found. It was found that cap of the kerosene tank of the said stove had come out of its socket and fallen down. It appears that this stove and the separated cap, though found on the spot was not seized under the spot panchanama. These articles were seized by PSI Jyoti under a spot panchanama (Exhibit 12). On 11-8-1999, PSI jyoti recorded the statements of nine witnesses. (l) On 12-8-1999 at about 2.20 pm PSI jyoti arrested the accused. On the same night deceased Ranjana expired in the hospital. PSI jyoti then added section 302 of the Indian Penal code to the crime. She drew an inquest panchanama of the dead body (Exhibit 11). She recorded the supplementary statements of the witnesses and issued a letter to the Medical officer to conduct a post-mortem on the dead-body of the Ranjana. (m) The post-mortem on the body of ranjana was conducted by PW 3 Dr. Seema bhaskarrao Deshmukh at the civil hospital between 11 am and 12 noon on 12-8-1999. During the post-mortem it was found that ranjana had suffered 90% superficial to deep burns. The cause of death was cardio respiratory failure due to septecemic shock due to 90% superficial to deep burns. (n) On 12-8-1999, 13-8-1999 and 15-8-1999, psi Jyoti recorded further statements. On 16-8-1999 she wrote a letter to the Milk dairy (Exhibit 34) in order to find out whether ranjana had borrowed any money from the society. On 18-8-1999 she received a letter dated 1/-8-1999 from the Milk Credit co-operative Society indicating that an amount of rs. 35,000/- had been sanctioned in her favour for house loan and after deducting her previous dues in respect of the previous loan, a cheque for a amount of Rs. 14,000/- was given on 18-10-1998. A reference to another emergency loan of Rs. 900/- given to Ranjana on 13-12-1997 was also made. PSI Jyoti caused a map of the scene of the offence to be made. She made inquiries with the RTO, Ahmednagar, as to whether any motor cycle had been registered in the name of the accused. She however, did not get any reply from the RTO. She sent the muddemal articles to the Chemical Analyser at aurangabad with Police Constable Athare, alongwith her covering letter. Police Constable athare carried these articles to the Chemical analyser. On receipt of the report of the chemical Analyser, PSI Jyoti filed a charge-sheet in the court.

(3.) On the case being committed to the Sessions Court, charge came to be framed and the trial commenced. On behalf of the prosecution, ten witnesses were examined to prove the prosecution case. PW 1 Dattu and pw 2 Babu were two panch witnesses examined to prove the spot panchanama. PW. 3 was Dr. Seema Deshmukh who had conducted the post-mortem. PW 8 Dr. Mohan gavai was examined to indicate the condition of Ranjana while giving her dying declaration to the Executive Magistrate. PW 6 Ashok Bhor was examined as the Executive Magistrate who had recorded the dying declaration of Ranjana. PW 4 Rajesh is the brother of Ranjana and he was examined to prove the oral dying declaration said to have been made to him. PW 5 avinash Kadam who was the son of deceased ranjana was examined to prove the oral dying declaration said to have been made by the deceased i. e. his mother to him. PW 9 Police constable Sathe was examined to indicate that he had issued a letter to the Special Executive magistrate for recording the dying declaration. PW 10 PSI Jyoti was examined as the investigation Officer.