2004 Supreme(Del) 942
High Court Of Delhi
MAYA - Appellant
Versus
STATE - Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL 244 of 2003
Decided On : 10/15/2004
Ravinder Chadha, Ritu Gauba
Headnote:Criminal – private defense – Sections 96, 99, 100 and 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 – appeal against conviction – whether appellant had right of private defense – onus to prove right on appellant – it would be enough if appellant can show that exercise of right justified – plea of defense need not be explicit - standard of proof expected from appellant and prosecution not same - plea of private defense stands discharged by proving preponderance of probabilities - in present case circumstances lends support to plea of private defense – held, appellant inflicted injury in course of right of private defense.
( 1 ) THIS criminal appeal arises out of a judgment and order on sentence passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi whereby the appellant has been convicted of an offence of murder punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 1,000/ -. In default of payment of the fine the appellant has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for. a period of 15 days.
( 2 ) BRIEFLY stated, the prosecution case is as under:-
( 3 ) AT about 3 a. m. on the night intervening 9th and 10th of March, 2001, Police Station, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-II, New Delhi received a telephonic information about a quarrel having taken place in House No. F-16, Harkesh Nagar, New Delhi within the limits of the said police station. The information was recorded in D. D. No. 36 of the said police station and PW-11 Head Constable Kishan Lal deputed to Visit the spot for necessary action. On reaching the spot, the said witness found a dead body lying in the room near the door of House No. F-16, Harkesh Nagar, new Delhi. A bottle of liquor containing some liquor in the same and a glass were also found on the table in the room apart from two kitchen knives stained in blood near the dead body. Blood was found on the floor as well as on the walls. The appellant Maya Devi was present in the room in a semi-conscious stage along with her child. Her clothes were blood stained and her face and head bore injury marks. PW-12 S. I. Sunil Kumar also reached the spot after being informed by PW-11 Kishan Lal. The appellant was sent to the hospital along with the. child. Statement of PW-1 mohd. Shamim was recorded and sent to the police station along with an endorsement marked Ex. PW12/1 through Constable Vivekanand for registration of a case. On receipt of the statement recorded by SI Sunil kumar, FIR No. 139/01 was registered in the police station for the commission of an offence under Section 302 of the IPC and investigation started.
( 4 ) DURING the course of investigation, statements of PW-2 Ramji and pw- 3 to PW-12, who happen to be police officials, were also recorded. The knives lying on the place of occurrence were seized, the blood sample lifted from the spot, the bottle of liquor lying in the room, the blood stained clothes of the accused/appellant herein and the medical evidence comprising the post mortem of the dead body and the report of the FSL assembled to file a chargesheet against the appellant accusing her of having killed her husband Kul Prasad by inflicting three stab wounds on his body.
( 5 ) THE prosecution case precisely was that the deceased Kul Prasad @ preti, who hailed from Nepal, was living with his wife, the appellant and son Ganga in a room on the first floor of House No. F-16, Harkesh Nagar, new Delhi. The other room situate on the said floor was occupied by PW-1 mohd. Shamim. The deceased Kul Prasad had brought the appellant to delhi from Nepal after her earlier husband had passed away. She had come along with her son from her first husband. The prosecution case further is that Kul Prasad used to often beat the appellant and her child, on trivial issues. Efforts made by other occupants of the building to make wise the deceased. Kul Prasad in this regard, had no effect. On the night intervening 9th and 10th March, 2001 at about 10 p. m. , PW-1 Mohd. Shamim returned home from the place of his work. A quarrel was at that time in progress between Kul Prasad and his wife Maya. The radio was playing at a very loud volume in their house. An exchange of harsh arguments between Kul Prasad and Maya was taking place and Kul Prasad was beating the child under the influence of liquor. Mohd Shamim is alleged to have gone to the room of Kul Prasad and asked him not to quarrel and to lower the volume of the radio. At about 2 a. m. the same night, cries and screams were heard from the room of Kul Prasad. Mohd. Shamim rushed out of his room and saw that Kul Prasad wa