RAJESH PUN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) - This is an appeal by Rajeshpuri under section 374, Cr. P. C. against the judgment of Sessions Judge, Bikaner, dated December 3, 1982 where by the appellant was convicted under section 302, I.P.C. for murder of his wife Smt. Manju and was sentenced to imprisonment for life.

(2.) Smt. Manju was married to the appellant on May 11, 1981. At or about 9.30. P. M. on October 8, 1981 Smt. Manju was brought in an ambulance from Hotel Roopam to P. B. M. Hospital, Bikaner, in a burnt condition along with her husband Rajeshpuri. There were superficial and deep burns all over the body of Smt. Manju of varing degrees except planter surface of both the feet, dorsum of both feet, vagina and surrounding area of skin and both auxiliary pits. There was seizing of scalp hair all over. Eyebrows and eye-lashes were completely burnt. The burnt area involved was about 90 to 95 p.c. of the total body surface area. Dr. P.N. Mathur P.W. 2 was at that time on duty as a Medical Jurist in P.B.M. Hospital, Bikaner. He examined the burns on the body of Smt. Manju aged 18 years at 9.30 P.M. of October 8, 1981 in new Y yard. Dr. P.N. Mathur then informed Ram Chandra Singh P.W. 11 who was Assistant Sub-Inspector Police posted at Police Station, Kotgate, Bikaner by telephone about this fact. Ramchandra Singh P.W. 11 proceeded to P.B.M. Hospital and reached new 'Y' yard where Smt. Manju had been admitted and was lying in a burnt condition. According to the prosecution, Smt. Manju was fit for giving statement and Ramchandra Singh recorded her dying declaration Ex. P. 18 at about 10.30 P.M. on the same date. In this dying declaration Smt. Manju stated that she was married to the appellant 5 months before the incident. She had stayed along with her husband (appellant) since October 7, 1981 in Roopam Hotel, On October 8, 1981 at about 8.30 P.M. she along with her husband had returned to the room in the hotel from her sisters house in Bikaner. At that time the appellant is said to have asked Smt. Manju as to whose house she had gone and hurled vulgar abuses to her. Thereafter the appellant sprinkled Kerosene oil on the body of Smt. Manju and lit fire to her clothes, which she was wearing. She was burnt on account of this reason. She raised a cry and shrieked. Then the appellant opened the door of the room in the hotel. Meanwhile several persons assembled and she was brought to the hospital. In the beginning the appellant had also tried to strangulate her. She stated that the appellant had burnt her in order to murder her. As both the hands of Smt. Manju were burnt she was not in a position to put her thumb marks on the dying declaration Ex. P. 18.

(3.) Smt. Manju was daughter of Kishorilal and Smt. Rami. Sheela P.W. 8, Santosh Devi, Rajkumari P.W. 9 and deceased Smt. Manju were real sisters. Smt. Manju was the youngest of the four sisters. Manoharlal P.W. 5. was the real brother of Smt. Manju. Manoharlal P.W. 5, Sheela P.W. 8 and Rajkumari P.W. 9 were living at Bikaner itself. The appellant Rajeshpuri was an L.D.C. in Rajasthan Canal Project and was posted at Bhikampur. He had come to Bikaner along with his wife Smt. Manju on October 7, 1981 on some official duty and had stayed in room No. 11 of Roopam Hotel which is just opposite Railway Station, Bikaner. According to Sheela P.W. 8, the appellant along with Smt. Manju had come to her house at about 10 A.M. on the date of the incident. Husband of Sheela was out to Haridwar. The appellant told Sheela that he was going to meet his Officer and Smt. Manju will remain at the house of Sheela. The appellant further told that he will come in the evening and take his dinner at Sheelas house. During day Smt. Manju remained at the house of Sheela. The appellant returned to the house of Sheela at about 5 or 5.30 P.M. He took afternoon tea at the house of Sheela and then left the house of Sheela along with Smt. Manju telling that he was going to his room in the hotel. Vinay Kumar P.W. 6 is .the son of Rajkumari P.W. 9 and he runs a cycle shop quite near the shop of Manoharlal P.W. 5, brother of Smt. Manju, At about 9.30 P.M. a person came to the shop of Vinay Kumar in order to take a cycle on hire. Vinay Kumar told him that he did not know him. That person told Vinay Kumar that he often used to take cycle on hire from the shop of Manoharlal P. W. 5. Vinay Kumar thereupon told that person to take the cycle from the shop of Manoharlal. Vinay Kumar was informed that Manoharlal was not at his shop because his sister had burnt. Vinay Kumar therefore, also closed his shop and went to his house to inform his mother Rajkumari P.W. 9 about the incident. On hearing this Rajkumari immediately went to the house of her elder sister Sheela P.W. 8 and informed her that their sister Smt. Manju had been burnt in the hotel and had been taken to the hospital. Both Sheela and Rajkumari thereupon proceeded to the hospital and reached there at about 11 P.M. They inquired from Smt. Manju about the matter. They stated that Smt. Manju told them that the appellant had taken her from the house of Sheela to Roopam Hotel. At the hotel the appellant asked Smt. Manju that whom she had met that day. Under suspicion the appellant bet Smt. Manju. Thereafter her ornaments were taken off and the appellant poured kerosene oil over her and burnt her. After burning her the appellant even attempted to run away but he was detained by the proprietor and servant of the hotel and brought back. This oral statement is alleged to have been made by Smt. Manju before her sisters Sheela P.W. 8 and Rajkumari P.W. 9 after they had reached the hospital.