VIDYA Vs. U.T. CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SMT . Vidya wife of Lal Chand, aged 50 years at the time of trial which was conducted in the year 1988-89, has filed the present criminal appeal and it has been directed against the judgment and order dated 5.1.1989 passed by learned Session Judge, Chandigarh, who convicted the appellant under Sections 498-A and 306 I.P.C. and sentenced her to undergo RI for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- under Section 498-A. In default of payment of fine the appellant was directed to further undergo RI for six months. She was sentenced to undergo RI for four years and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- under Section 306 I.P.C In default of payment of fine she was directed to further undergo RI for six months. The trial Court also ordered that both the sentences shall run concurrently.

(2.) SMT . Vidya appellant was charge-sheeted with the allegations that from 13.8.1986 to 13.9.1987 she being the mother-in-law of Smt. Raj Rani treated her with cruelty through her wilful conduct which drove Raj Rani to commit suicide and thereby she committed an offence punishable under Section 498-A. Secondly, it was alleged against her that on 13.9.1987 at about 4.30 a.m. Raj Rani inside her house bearing No. 1145, Sector 19-B, Chandigarh committed suicide and that she abetted its commission by subjecting Raj Rani to cruelty by maltreating her, finding fault with all her doing, accused her not to give birth to a male child etc. and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 306 I.P.C.

(3.) THE investigation of this case was conducted by SI Vijay Kumar, Incharge, Police Post, Sector 19, Chandigarh. On 13.9.1987 the Investigating officer received a telephonic call at 5.30 a.m. regarding the burning of the deceased. The information that trickled to him was that a lady named Raj Rani had set herself on fire in House No. 1145, Sector 19-B, Chandigarh. The Sub Inspector after incorporating the said information in DDR No. 27 of that date, copy of which is Ex. PQ, in the company of other police officials set out for House No. 1145, Sector 19-B, Chandigarh. On reaching there he was informed that Raj Rani had been shifted to PGI, Chandigarh. Therefore, he deputed Constable Kanwar Pal to guard the spot and he along with other police officials left for PGI. On reaching there he came to know that Raj Rani was admitted in Emergency Ward. He then told his companion SI Harcharan Singh to draft request Ex. PH which he presented before the doctor attending on Raj Rani in order to know her mental state. Dr. Parkash M. vide his endorsement Ex. PH/1 gave his opinion that Raj Rani was not fit to make statement. Thereafter, SI Harcharan Singh again approached the doctor with a view to find out if there was any improvement in the condition of Raj Rani. This time Dr. N.P.S. Sandhu who answered the query vide endorsement Ex. PH declared the injured fit to make statement. This was done by the doctor at 7.15 a.m. The Investigating officer then questioned Raj Rani and recorded her statement Ex. PK. Dr. Sandhu attested the same for its authenticity and for corroborating the fact that the injured was in her complete senses to make the statement. The statement of injured was sent to police station along with endorsement Ex. PK/2 made by SI Vijay Kumar. At Police Station formal FIR Ex. PK/3 was prepared by SI Gurnam Singh. The Investigating officer then deputed SI Harcharan Singh to contact an Executive Magistrate and request him to visit PGI for recording the statement of injured. SI Harcharan Singh acted accordingly. He brought Shri Rajinder Sharma, Executive Magistrate to PGI who recorded Ex. PC statement of Raj Rani. Subsequently Raj Rani succumbed to her burn injuries and expired. The information regarding the death of Raj Rani was conveyed by the PGI authorities to the police. SI Vijay Kumar then went to PGI and prepared inquest report Ex. PF. The dead body was subjected to post-mortem examination. On completion of the investigation the appellant was challaned in the Court of Area Magistrate who supplied the copies of the documents to the appellant and vide separate commitment order the appellant was sent to the Court of Session to face trial.