SUMITRA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE instant appeal has been filed against the judgment rendered by the Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtak, dated 9.4.2002, whereby the accused/appellant - Sumitra has been held guilty of having committed the murder of Sunita, under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. By a separate order dated 11.4.2002, the accused/appellant - Sumitra, after being heard on the question of sentence, has been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ -. In default of payment of fine, she has been ordered to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month.

(2.) THE prosecution version of the incident is based on the sequence of events emerging out of the death of Ishwar Singh, his wife Sunita and their two daughters Renu and Reetu. Deceased - Ishwar Singh is stated to be employed in the army. Ishwar Singh deceased is stated to have returned to his village Ajaib on 18.12.1998 on 15 days leave from the army. Although, the parental family of Ishwar Singh lives at village Ajaib, his wife Sunita always stays with her own parents during the period Ishwar Singh is away. On 18.12.1998, in order to collect his wife from Jai Jai Wanti i.e. the village where the parents of his wife reside, Ishwar Singh is alleged to have proceeded towards village Jai Jai Wanti before going to his own village Ajaib. Having taken his wife Sunita and children, Renu and Reetu from village Jai Jai Wanti, he is alleged to have reached the village of his parents Ajaib, on 18.12.1998 itself. During the intervening night of 18/19.12.1998, some persons from village Ajaib reached village Jai Jai Wanti and contacted Sunita's brother Jagbir PW 13 and informed him, that Ishwar Singh, Sunita, and their two daughters Renu and Reetu had been burnt. They also informed him, that while Ishwar Singh and the two daughters Renu and Reetu had succumbed to their burn injuries, Sunita was still alive, and that, she had been admitted at the Post -graduate Institute of Medical Sciences and Research, Rohtak (hereinafter referred to as the PGIMS, Rohtak). On receipt of the aforesaid information, Jagbir PW 13, his wife Anita and uncle Ram Bhagat PW 14, alongwith several other persons of the village, proceeded towards Rohtak. On the way, when they had reached village Lakhan Majra, they were told by certain persons belonging to village Ajaib, that Sunita had not been taken to Rohtak, and that, she was still at village Ajaib. Jagbir PW 13, his wife Anita and uncle Ram Bhagat PW 14 then proceeded towards village Ajaib. Having reached village Ajaib, they found that the eyes of Sunita had been burnt, and as such, she was not able to see, but she had recognised them and others on the basis of their voices. On meeting Sunita, Jagbir PW 13 asked her as to what had happened. Whereupon, Sunita informed them, that Sumitra, wife of Ratan (younger brother of her husband Ishwar Singh) had poured kerosene oil on all the members of her family while they were sleeping, and then put them on fire. According to the narration of Sunita to Jagbir PW 13, despite being engulfed in fire, she had followed Sumitra, who had gone down stairs, and that, Sunita had seen Sumitra entering the main house. In the middle of the stair case, however, Sunita explained that she having been fully engulfed in the flames of fire, became helpless and fell down. After listening her version of the incident, Jagbir PW 13 i.e. the brother of Sunita, wanted to immediately shift his sister to the PGIMS, Rohtak. However, he was not allowed to do so by 100/150 persons of village Ajaib, unless Sunita took the blame of the fire on herself. In order to get his sister medically treated without any further delay, Jagbir PW 13 is stated to have agreed to the suggestion. Whereupon, Sunita, as well as, the dead bodies of Ishwar Singh, Renu and Reetu were taken to the PGIMS, Rohtak. On the same day i.e. on 19.12.1998, Sunita was medically examined. Her medical examination revealed, that she had suffered 75 -80% burn injuries. On the following day i.e. on 20.12.1998, Sunita was declared fit to make a statement. ASI Kamlesh Kumar PW 16, accordingly, approached the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtak, for recording her statement. Although, Sunita had been declared fit to make a statement at 3.15 PM, however, when Mr. Bhupinder Nath, Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Rohtak, was to commence to record her statement, she lost her senses, and on her re -examination she was declared unfit to make a statement. On 21.12.1998, Sunita was again declared fit to make a statement. Whereupon, at the instance of the investigating officer, Ms. Sunita Goyal, Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Rohtak, reached the PGIMS, Rohtak to record her statement. Prior to recording her statement, the doctor on duty declared Sunita fit to make a statement at 4.15 PM. Ms. Sunita Goyal, Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Rohtak, then proceeded to record the statement of Sunita. After the statement of Sunita had been fully recorded, another opinion in respect of her fitness was sought. Yet again, at 4.40 PM, Sunita was again declared fit. While making her statement, Sunita asserted, that the wife of the younger brother of her husband, Sumitra had burnt her. According to the narration of Sunita, when every body had gone to sleep, Sumitra had come to their room. Whilst they were sleeping, she sprinkled kerosene oil on them and then lit the same with a match stick. After having put them on fire, Sumitra was proceeding to leave. At that juncture, Sunita having woken up raised an alarm. Neighbours from the vicinity rescued her by covering her with a quilt and by throwing ash on her. She also stated, that in the incident, Ishwar Singh her husband and both her daughters, Renu and Reetu had died. After Sunita's statement was recorded by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Rohtak, on 21.12.1998, a First Information Report bearing No.455 was registered at Police Station, Meham in district Rohtak, on 21.12.1998 at 6.30 PM under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) DURING the course of the trial, the prosecution examined a number of witnesses. A brief description of the statement of witnesses produced by the prosecution, is being summarised hereunder. The prosecution, first of all, examined Gian Chand, Ahlmed in the Court of Ms. Sunita Goyal, Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Rohtak, as PW 1. Gian Chand PW 1 produced the envelop containing the statement of the deceased - Sunita recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code. SI Jai Parkash was produced by the prosecution as PW 2. SI Jai Parkash PW 2 had partly investigated the case and recorded some statements under Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Constable Radhey Sham was produced as PW 3. He is stated to have prepared the scaled site plan Ex.PA, of the place of occurrence alongwith its marginal notes. The statement of Ravinder Kumar was recorded as PW 4. Ravinder Kumar PW 4 tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.PB. A perusal of his affidavit reveals, that he had delivered the special report to the Ilaqa Magistrate, Rohtak at 1.30 PM. The statement of Mr. Bhupinder Nath, Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Rohtak, was recorded as PW 5. As per his statement, he had received an application from ASI Kamlesh Kumar PW 16, to record the statement of Sunita. He had, accordingly, proceeded to the PGIMS, Rohtak to record her statement. Although, the doctor at the hospital initially opined, that Sunita was fit to make a statement, but she had collapsed in the meantime and, therefore, her statement could not recorded. The statement of Dr. R.P. Verma was recorded as PW 6. Dr. R.P. Verma PW 6 had medico -legally examined Sunita when she was brought to the hospital with burn injuries. According to Dr. R.P. Verma PW 6, Sunita had suffered 75 -80% burn injuries. The statement of Dr. Asha Goyal was recorded as PW 7. Dr. Asha Goyal had conducted the postmortem examination on the dead bodies of Ishwar Singh, Renu and Reetu on 19.12.1998. In the opinion of Dr. Asha Goyal PW 7, the cause of death of Ishwar Singh, Renu and Reetu was on account of shock as a result of 100% burn injuries, which were ante -mortem in nature, and were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. The statement of Ms. Sunita Goyal, Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Rohtak was recorded as PW 8. She deposed, that an application had been made to her by ASI Kamlesh Kumar PW 16 to record the statement of Sunita. She also stated, that the doctor on duty at the PGIMS, Rohtak, had given his opinion Ex.PT to the effect, that Sunita was fit to make her statement. She also asserted, that she had recorded the statement of Sunita correctly without any addition or omission. She proved in Court the statement of Sunita Ex. PV which had been in hand written by her, and which also bore her signatures. After the statement of Sunita had been recorded, Dr. Hari Singh Saini PW 21 certified, that Sunita had remained fit during the recording of her statement. Ms. Sunita Goyal PW 8 also stated, that Dr. Hari Singh Saini had remained present with her all the time whilst she had recorded the statement of Sunita. She also affirmed, that the attendants of other patients had been asked to leave the room when the statement of Sunita was recorded. At the time of recording the statement of Sunita, ASI Kamlesh Kumar PW 16 had been asked to stand outside the room. The prosecution then produced Head Constable Phool Singh as PW 9. He tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.PAA. A perusal of Ex.PAA reveals, that HC Phool Singh PW 9 had deposited certain samples taken from the place of occurrence in the Malkhana of Police Station, Meham, and subsequently he had handed over those samples to Constable Krishan Kumar for delivering them to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Madhuban. Head Constable Sube Singh appeared as PW 10. He deposed that he had recorded the formal First Information Report consequent upon the receipt of the statement of Sunita, despatched to the police station by ASI Kamlesh Kumar PW 16. The statement of Dr. Pinaki from the PGIMS, Rohtak, was recorded as PW 11. Dr. Pinaki PW 16 affirmed that an application was made by the police on 20.12.1998 requiring him to opine, whether or not, Sunita was fit to make a statement. He had given his opinion at 3.15 PM on 20.12.1998 to the effect, that Sunita was fit to make a statement. However, by the time the judicial officer had reached the hospital to record the statement of Sunita, he had recorded another statement at 3.30 PM, that Sunita was not fit to make a statement. Sukhbir Singh appeared as PW 12. He produced the original record enclosed with bed head ticket of Sunita from the PGIMS, Rohtak. The prosecution examined Jagbir as PW 13. Jagbir PW 13 is none other than the brother of deceased - Sunita. During the course of his deposition, he asserted, that his sister Sunita was married to Ishwar Singh. He also confirmed, that Ishwar Singh was employed in the Indian Army, and that, Sunita remained with her parental family while her husband Ishwar Singh was on duty. However, whenever he returned to his village on leave, she used to accompany him to her in -laws house. Sunita is stated to have two daughters Renu and Reetu. On 18.12.1998, when Ishwar Singh had come on leave, he had taken his wife (Sunita) to her in -laws house. Sunita had also taken her daughters to her matrimonial home on 18.12.1998. On the following day i.e. on 19.12.1998, at 4.30/5.00 AM, 4/5 persons from village Ajaib had informed Jagbir PW 13 that Sunita, her husband Ishwar Singh and their daughters Renu and Reetu had suffered burn injuries. They informed them, that Ishwar Singh, Renu and Reetu had died, whereas Sunita was struggling with her life at the PGIMS, Rohtak. Accordingly, Jagbir PW 13, his wife Anita and his uncle Ram Bhagat PW 14, besides Ranbir, Sarpanch of the village and 3/4 other persons proceeded towards Rohtak. However, when they had reached village Lakhan Majra, they were informed that Sunita was still at village Ajaib. Accordingly, they had proceeded to village Ajaib. At village Ajaib, according to the statement of Jagbir PW 13, he had found that his sister Sunita was in proper senses, despite the fact, that her eyes had been burnt, she was able to identify them by their voices. Sunita's uncle Ram Bhagat PW 14 enquired from her how it had all happened. Sunita informed them that Sumitra had entered their room and poured kerosene oil on her husband, her daughters. At that stage, Sunita had woken up. However, before she could raise an alarm, Sumitra had set them on fire. Despite having been put on fire, Sunita claimed that she had followed Sumitra. However, on account of being engulfed by the flames, she had collapsed and had fallen down. However, Sunita stated that she had seen Sumitra entering the house at the ground floor and closing the door. Jagbir PW 13 also asserted, that about 150 people of the village Ajaib had collected there and prevented them from taking Sunita to the PGIMS, Rohtak, till Sunita took upon herself the responsibility of the incident. Since Sunita needed medical treatment immediately, they had agreed to the demand of the villagers. Thereafter, Sunita alongwith the dead bodies of Ishwar Singh, Renu and Reetu were taken to the PGIMS, Rohtak. At the hospital, Sunita insisted on making a truthful statement. Before her death on 22.12.1998, she recorded her statement on 21.12.1998. The factual position depicted by Jagir PW 13 was reiterated by the uncle of deceased - Sunita i.e Ram Bhagat PW 14. The statement of Constable Krishan Kumar was recorded as PW 15. He affirmed that he had taken two sealed parcels and delivered them at the Forensic Science Laboratory, Madhuban. The statement of the Investigating Officer Kamlesh Kumar was recorded as PW 16. He affirmed that he was the Investigating Officer of the case and recorded the formalities required to be conducted by him during the course of the investigation of this case. The statement of Dr. Ajay Kumar Goel, Medical Officer, T.B. Centre, Rohtak was recorded as PW 17. He had conducted the postmortem examination on the dead body of Sunita on 22.12.1998. According to his opinion, the cause of death of Sunita was due to extensive burns and consequential complications thereof. He opined, that the burn injuries were ante -mortem in nature, and were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. The statement of Dr. S.S. Dahiya was recorded as PW 18. He asserted, that on 19.12.1998, Sunita was admitted to his ward with burn injuries. The police had asked him to give his opinion, whether or not, she was fit to make a statement. On 19.12.1998 at 2.45 PM, he had opined, that she was not fit to make a statement. The statement of Gian Singh was recorded as PW 19. His statement is formal relating to the arrest of the accused/appellant - Sumitra. The statement of SI Ramphal Singh was recorded as PW 20. His statement was also formal in nature as he had partly investigated the case by recording the statements of Jagbir PW 13, Anita wife of Jagbir, and Ram Bhagat PW 14 under Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Last of all, the prosecution examined Dr. Hari Singh Saini, Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Kaithal as PW 21. He affirmed, that he had recorded the certificate Ex.PT/1 on 21.12.1998, that Sunita was fit to make a statement. He also asserted, that he had remained present with Ms. Sunita Goyal, Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Rohtak, when the statement of Sunita was recorded by the Magistrate. Having examined the aforesaid witnesses, the prosecution evidence was closed on 28.3.2002.