BANSIYA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred against the judgement dated 19-6-92 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Balotra, whereby he convicted appellants Bansiya and his father Chela Ram for the offence under Section 306, I.P.C. and sentenced appellant Bansiya to rigorous imprisonment for seven years and a fine of Rs. two thousand and in default to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and appellant Chela Ram to rigorous imprisonment for five years and a fine of Rs. five hundred and in default to further undergo six month's imprisonment.

(2.) Briefly the facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal are that Smt. Rani Meghwal, deceased, was married to appellant Bansiya some time in July, 1990. After marriage, she remained at her in-laws' house situated in village Jasol for about a week. Thereafter, she went to her parents house (Peehar) situated in village Asotra, where she stayed for about two months. Again, she went to her in-laws house, stayed for one and a half months and came back to her 'Peehar'. Lastly about one and a half months prior to the date of occurrence i.e. 14-5-1991, she was living with the appellants. On 13-5-91 i.e. one day earlier to 'aakhateej', P.W. 7 Chhagana Ram, the brother of the deceased Smt. Rani, went to fetch her but appellant Chela Ram and his wife co-accused Smt. Mangi neither talked to him nor sent Smt. Rani with him. Thereupon, Chhagana Ram came back to his house and asked his wife P.W. 5 Smt. Anchi, who is also the niece of appellant Chela Ram, to bring Smt. Rani. Smt. Anchi did not return till 6 p.m. Thereupon, P.W. 7 Chhagana Ram again went to the house of appellants and asked his wife Smt. Anchi to come back, but the appellants did not send Smt. Rani. It is the case of the prosecution that thereupon, the appellant did not send Smt. Rani and told Chhagana Ram that now, he would see the dreams of taking his sister It is the case of the prosecution that thereafter, P.W. 7 Chhagana Ram and P.W. 5 Smt. Anchi came back to village Asotra. On the next day i.e. 14-5-91, the S.D.M., Balotra called Chhagana Ram to appellants' house, where he found that Smt. Rani was lying dead after receiving extensive burn injuries in her house. It may be mentioned here that on 14-5-91 at 4.20 p.m. appellant Chela Ram submitted a written report Ex. P. 9 to the S.H.O., Police Station, Siwana, wherein he submitted that on the same day at about 12 noon, his wife (co-accused Smt. Mangi) informed him, while he was coming from the 'Bera' to the village, that appellant Bansiya's wife Smt. Rani had burnt herself after sprinkling kerosene oil on her body inside the closed room. She also informed that at that time, she had gone to the flourmill for grinding the wheat and that other members of the family had gone to Poonamji's Bera. Chela Ram also mentioned in his report that his son Bansiya had gone to Balotra; that he rushed to his house, where he found Bansiya's wife lying dead. He further mentioned that his daughter-in-law Smt. Rani had committed suicide after sprinkling kerosene oil on her body. On further interrogation made by Shri Jalam Singh, SHO, appellant Chela Ram also informed him that Smt. Rani was aged about 18 years; that she was married to his son Bansiya about eleven months back and that on 13-5-91, Chhagana Ram and his wife Smt. Anchi had come to his house for taking Smt. Rani to village Jasol but he did not send her and that for that reason, the deceased Smt. Rani became infuriated and after getting the opportunity, committed suicide. Thereupon, an inquest report No. 5/91 under Section 174, Cr. P.C. was drawn and the same was sent to the S.D.M., Balotra, who rushed to the place of occurrence and got the site plan Ex. P. 19 and memo thereof Ex. P. 5 prepared. He also got the post-mortem examination of the dead body of Smt. Rani conducted by a Board of doctors consisting of P.W. 6 Dr. O. P. Vyas and P.W. 10 Dr. B. P. Lohiya. The doctors found extensive deep burns on the entire body. The skin was peeled off. The pleurae, larynax and trachea, right and left lungs, pericardium, spleen and kidney were congested. The heart and large vessels were empty. The abdomen walls were blackened with peeled off skin. The mouth was swollen and protruded. The doctors did not notice any injury like bruises, abrasions and other wounds because of the extensive burns all over the body. The doctors vide the postmortem examination report Ex. P. 3 opined that the cause of death was extensive deep hundred per cent burns. They how ever preserved the visceras and sent for chemical examination but it appears that no chemical examination report was received. The S.D.M. also examined Chhagana Ram, the brother of the deceased, Smt. Anchi and Smt. Nathi besides the appellants and other witnesses. The S.D.M. concluded that from his enquiry, it was fairly established that the deceased prior to her death was mentally and physically fit; that the room in which the incident took place was not bolted from inside; that Smt. Mangi, the mother-in-law of the deceased even after knowing about the incident did not immediately inform the villagers and that one day prior to the ill fated incident day, the appellant Chela Ram and Smt. Mangi did not send the deceased to her parents house along with Chhagana Ram and Smt. Anchi, who had come to fetch her and that the appellants were harassing and maltreating the deceased and were also suspecting about her character and, thus, they abetted/compelled her to commit suicide. He, therefore, sent a detailed report of his enquiry dt. 28-5-91 Ex. P. 8 along with the record of the enquiry including the statements of Chhagana Ram, Smt. Anchi and Smt. Nathi to the S.H.O., P.S., Siwana for registering a case under Section 306 and 498-A, I.P.C. Thereupon, formal FIR Ex. P. 10 was drawn and the case was registered against the appellants and co-accused Smt. Mangi, who has been acquitted by the learned trial Judge. After usual investigation, a challan was filed against the appellants and co-accused Smt. Mangi before the M.J.M., Balotra, who in his turn committed the case to the learned trial Judge. The learned Sessions Judge after hearing the parties and considering the evidence collected by the Investigating Officer by his order dated 29-1-92 discharged the accused persons for the offence under Section 498-A, I.P.C. and framed charge for the offence under Section 306, I.P.C. only to which they pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined as many as thirteen witnesses. Appellants in their plea recorded under Section 313, Cr. P.C. admitted that deceased Smt. Rani was married to appellant Bansiya in July, 1990 but denied that they harassed or mal-treated or subjected her to cruelty. On the other hand, they asserted that Smt. Rani often used to go to her parents house. They also denied that on 13-5-91, Chhagana Ram and Smt. Anchi had come to fetch her. Appellant Bansiya pleaded that on the day of the alleged incident, he was not present in village Asotra, and had gone to Balotra, where he was working in a factory. Appellant Chela Ram denied that he had told Chhagana Ram that now, he would dream for taking the deceased. The appellants asserted that there was no chain 'sankal' inside the door of the room, where Smt. Rani had committed suicide.

(3.) After trial, the learned Sessions Judge felt that it was a tit case, wherein presumption under Section 113-A, Evidence Act be drawn against the appellants, who have failed to discharge the burden. He further held that it was not at all a case of dowry death or a case for demanding the dowry but from the evidence, it was established that the appellants subjected her to cruelty and, thus, abetted her to commit suicide. He, however, by giving benefit of reasonable doubt, acquitted co-accused Smt. Mangi but by his impugned judgement dt. 19-6-92 convicted and sentenced the appellants under Section 306, I.P.C. in the manner indicated above. Hence this appeal.