SHAMEEM Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant Shameem was tried by the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Panipat, under Section 302 IPC, for committing the murder of his wife Naiyma. Vide judgment of conviction dated 11.9.2002 and the order of sentence dated 16.9.2002, the appellant has been convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months.

(2.) In the present case, the appellant was married with Naiyma 8/9 years prior to the day of occurrence. After the marriage, the appellant along with his wife was residing in a rented room at Panipat and was doing labour work in a factory. On 8.11.1998 at 8.50 AM, he got admitted his wife in the Hospital in burnt condition. Dr. S.K. Gupta (PW.3) medico legally examined the patient and as per the MLR (Ex. PF), superficial to deep burns to the extent of 85% to 90% were found all over her body, except some part of lower limbs. On the same day at 9.05 AM, the hospital authorities sent ruqa (Ex. PJ) informing the police about admission of the wife of the appellant in burnt condition. On receiving the said information, ASI Rajiv Kumar (PW.8), Incharge Police Post Kishanpura went to General Hospital, Panipat and moved an application (Ex. PG) seeking opinion of the concerned Doctor about the fitness of the patient to make the statement. On the same day, at 10.30 AM, Dr. S.K. Gupta, gave the opinion that the patient was fit to make the statement. Thereafter, ASI Rajiv Kumar went to the Ilaqa Magistrate and moved an application (Ex. PN) to record the statement of the patient. Thereupon, Ms. Ritu Garg, Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Panipat, went to General Hospital, Panipat and sought the opinion of the doctor about the fitness of the patient to make statement. At 11.35 AM, Dr. S.K. Gupta again opined that the patient was fit to make statement. Thereafter, the Judicial Magistrate recorded the statement (Ex. PH/2) of Naiyma, wherein she had stated that her husband had given beating to her with wood and then after closing the door, he set her on fire by sprinkling kerosene oil on her body. Her Devar Mehrudin came, but her husband did not open the door. She further stated that she did not know as to how she was taken out of the room. Thereafter, vide opinion (Ex. PH/1), Dr. S.K. Gupta certified that the patient remained conscious during the course of recording her statement. Thereafter, ASI Rajiv Kumar moved an application (Ex. PN/1) before the Magistrate requesting her to take copy of the statement of the patient, which was allowed on the same day by the Magistrate vide order (Ex. PN/2). Copy of the statement of the patient was obtained and on the basis of the same, the formal FIR (Ex. PO/2) under Section 307 IPC was registered against the appellant on 8.11.1998 at 1.20 PM. Thereafter, ASI Rajiv Kumar went to the place of occurrence and prepared the rough site plan (Ex. PQ) with correct marginal notes. From the place of occurrence, one curtain soaked in kerosene oil, one match box and a five liters cane, out of which smell of kerosene oil was coming out, were taken into possession vide memo (Ex. PL), which was attested by Krishan Gupta, Municipal Commissioner, Panipat and Constable Davinder Singh (PW.5).

(3.) On the next day i.e. on 9.11.1998 at 5.30 AM, Naiyma died due to burn injuries. On receiving the information about her death, offence under Section 302 IPC was added. At 3.30 PM, Dr. S.K. Khurana (PW.4) conducted her post mortem examination of the deceased. In the post mortem report (Ex. PK), the doctor opined that cause of death of the deceased was shock due to burns which were ante-mortem in nature and were sufficient to cause death in natural course. The appellant was arrested on 9.11.1998.