KUSUM LATE Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved by the judgment and order of conviction recorded in Sessions case no. I 1/85 dated 4.11.1985 by the Sessions Judge, Banswara, the appellant now begs to prefer this appeal on the grounds mentioned in the memo of appeal as also submitted during the course of hearing.

(2.) With the assistance of the learned counsel for the parties, we have scrutinised the record and re-appreciated the evidence. The prosecution story, stated briefly, is that on 3.5.1984 at about 8.30 in the evening it was observed by PW I Dr. Sunil Kumar that when he was called to see a serious patient and when he visited the patient he saw that the patient was dead. The deceased was one Navin Kumar husband of the accused Kusumlata. PW 1 has deposed that when he saw the patient, the patient was dead. He did not administer any treatment to the patient. It is pertinent to note that the incident has taken place in May, 1984 and the investigation and prosecution was taken up only in Dec., 1984. As will be seen from the evidence, even no suspicion was expressed in regard to the commission of any offence by the accused.

(3.) PW 2 Ishaq is the uncle of the deceased Navin and had brought up the deceased. The witness has deposed that when he met Navin Kumar on the fateful day at about 5.30 in the evening, Navin Kumar was hale and hearty and was not in any manner ill. The witness has charted with the deceased for about half an hour and left him alive. It is deposed by the witness that the marriage between the accused and the deceased had taken place about 15 . years ago and their matrimonial life was normal. Some times there used to be quarrels between the husband and the wife. Navin Kumar had stayed in Kuwait to earn substantial money and used to complain that inspite of his sending so much money there is no account for that money. Even though Ishaq PW 2 has stated in this deposition that he doubted natural death of Navin Kumar, it is pertinent to note that he has no where alleged that he even doubted homicidal death of Navin Kumar caused by Kusumlata, the present accused. He admits in his cross-examination that his statement was recorded by the police 7 days after the date of incident. It will thus he seen that for more than six months the death of Navin Kumar was considered by all concerned either suicidal or accidental.