RAM KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DHARAMWATI whose marriage was solemnised by her mother with appellant Ram Kumar in May 1988 died an unnatural death on 21st of September, 1991 or little earlier. In fact, it is not only proved but conceded during the arguments by the learned defence counsel that she was murdered. The sole but significant question that still, however, survives is as to whether she was done to death by her husband Ram Kumar and hi s parents Seho Karan and Day awati who were charged under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code as also under Sections 304-B and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and were convicted by Shri M. K. Bansal, Sessions Judge, Gurgaon vide order of conviction and sentence recorded against the appellants herein under Section 304-B to undergo R. I. for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each, in default whereof they were further ordered to undergo R. I. for two months as also under Section 201 to undergo R. I. for two years each as also under Section 498-a of the Indian Penal Code to undergo R. I. for one year each. All substantive sentences were, however, ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) A brief narration of facts leading to unfortunate death of Dharamwati, before the question posed in this appeal is answered, needs a necessary mention. On 22nd of September, 1991 at about 7. 30 p. m. Chand Kishore got his statement recorded to ASI Ajmer Singh at police post GRPS Rewari on the basis of which formal F. I. R. came to be recorded at 9. 30 p. m. on the same day. Special report with regard to the incident as reported by Chand Kishore was received by the Magistrate at 6. 00 a. m. on 23rd September, 1991. Chand Kishore stated that his father had expired about four years ago and his mother Smt. Shanti Devi was alive. They are four brothers and two sisters. Karan Singh being the eldest, he was younger to him and still younger to him was Attar Singh and his sisters are Jagwati and Dharamwati. His sister Dharamwati deceased was married with Ram Kumar son of Sheokaran in the month of May 1988. In the marriage he and his family members had given sufficient dowry as per Hindu rites. She remained happy there for a few days. Thereafter his Jija (sister's husband) Ram Kumar, his father Sheokaran and his mother (his sister's mother-in-law) Dayawati started harassing his sister and compelled her for bringing more dowry time and again. His maternal uncle's son Ram Kumar, his maternal uncle Chandan Lal and he himself had visited many times house of the in-laws of his sister to advise them after they had picked up a quarrel. All the three i. e. Ram Kumar, Sheo Karan and Dayawati did not agree with him and continued mal-treating her. After four/five months of the birth of a daughter, they demanded a scooter in Chuchak but he was unable to fulfil their demand. Due to his grouse, all of them having connived with each other killed his sister and placed the dead body on Railway line so that the same might be cut by some train and that they might escape. Sajjan Singh informed him about this occurrence in the village that dead body of Dharamwati was lying on railway line between railway station of Jawri Sanpka and Patti. He further told that he had not know the reason of death. On receipt of information he along with his cousin (maternal uncle's son) Ram Kumar and his brother Bhim Singh reached village Khawaspur where they came to know that dead body of his sister had been sent to Gurgaon. Whereupon all of them reached the Civil Hospital, Gurgaon and identified the dead body of his sister. After verifying the facts he along with his companions reached Police Post, Railway Gurgaon. Ram Kumar, Seho Karan and mother-in-law Dayawati after hatching a conspiracy killed his sister Dharamwati and placed her dead body on the railway line and had tried to hush up the matter.

(3.) DR . S. P. Singh stated that on 22nd of September, 1991 at 5. 00 p. m. he along with Dr. Prem Kumar had conducted the post-mortem examination of the dead body of Dharamwati. The body was moderately built and nourished of a lady. Rigor mortis was absent. Right eye protruded out. Left eye was missing lips and tongue and right hand finger nails bluish. Left hand with fore arm was missing. The body was smeared with blackish oil at places. There was a ligature mark, well defined and slightly depressed, situated low down in the neck, below the thyroid cartilage which was encircled horizontally and completely. The breadth of ligature mark was about 1 cm. Base of the groove was brown in colour, ecchymosis was present. Left cornu of thyroid bone was fractured. There was lacerated wound over the forehead, extending upto middle of skull. There was also lacerated wound over the right side of chin, size 1w x 1" as also over the middle of the right thigh measuring 1" in diameter. Both legs were amputated below knee joints and crushed, right absent, left only foot was present. The right buttock was having lacerated wound of size 6" x 4" x 3" deep. It was eaten by animals. Brain matter was also absent. On dissection, fracture of right thigh, fracture of frontal and both parietal and occipital bones was found in pieces. The cause of death in the opinion of the doctor was asphyxia caused by strangulation. Strangulation was ante-mortem in nature and the remaining described injuries except ligature mark were post-mortem injuries and the strangulation was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. The police history revealed that it was a case of death because of the railway accident. On re-examination the doctor stated that the ligature found on the dead body could be with a thin rope.