Back
ASSAM AND NAGALAND HIGH COURT
M.C. Pathak , P.K. Goswam, J.
MRS. MEERA PURI, ACCUSED
VERSUS
THE STATE OF NAGALAND
Criminal Appeal No. 56 of 1970 (Form decision of M. H. Khan, State level Addl. Dy. Commr. (J) Nagaland, Camp Court at Dinapur,)
Decided on : 18-5-1970, September 18, 1970.
CRIMINAL APPEAL - Murder - Conviction under Section 302, Penal Code - Evidence - Appreciation - Identification of accused - Dying declaration - Ballistic Expert's opinion - Rash and negligent act - Offence under Section 304A, Penal Code - Conviction and sentence altered.
Fact of the Case:
The accused, Mrs. Meera Puri, was convicted under Section 302, Penal Code, for committing murder by intentionally or knowingly causing the death of Alemnaro Ao by firing at her with a .22 bore rifle. The prosecution case was that on 4th April, 1969, at about 5.00 p.m., the deceased Miss Alemnaro Ao, a young girl of about ten years of age, was going by the circular road at Mokokchung with her mother Mrs. Asangla Ao (P.W. 2), her about Miss Amenla Ao (P.W. 4) and her two cousins, who were the daughters of Obangtemjen Ao (P.W. 1). P.W. 1 has married the sister of P.Ws. 2 and 4. This small party walking by the road saw some edible leaves below the road and the children went down to pick these up. At this time, two ladies were seen in the compound of Major Puri's house at a short distance from the hospital road which is at a higher level than the house situated on a slope of a hill. The area is hilly. The two ladies came down to the corner of their compound and shouted "Jao Jao". After that, two dogs came barking at them. Some earth was pelted at the dogs by the mother. The mother also called back the children to return. As the party was about to return, a 'Thak' sound of a gunfire was heard and when they looked towards the side from which the sound was coming, they saw the accused lowering down a gun. The deceased was hit by a bullet and she immediately gave out that "Mother, out of the two ladies the younger one has shot me". The daughter was picked up by the mother and P.W. 4 was sent to report to P.W. 1. He came within about fifteen minutes and took the child to the military hospital, where however there was no doctor available and in an army vehicle she was brought to the civil hospital where the doctors treated her. The small child died two days after on 6th April, 1969 at 9.00 a.m.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the accused had fired from the rifle that has been seized and the bullet discharged from the rifle in her hand hit the deceased. However, the court held that the accused did not intend to cause death of the deceased by firing or knew that by this act of hers she would cause death of the deceased. The court also found that the accused had committed an offence under Section 304A, Penal Code, for causing death by rash and negligent act.
Issues: 1. Whether the accused had fired from the rifle that has been seized and the bullet discharged from the rifle in her hand hit the deceased? 2. Whether the accused intended to cause death of the deceased by firing or knew that by this act of hers she would cause death of the deceased? 3. Whether the accused had committed an offence under Section 304A, Penal Code, for causing death by rash and negligent act?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court relied on the evidence of the eye-witnesses, the medical evidence, and the Ballistic Expert's opinion to conclude that the accused had fired from the rifle that has been seized and the bullet discharged from the rifle in her hand hit the deceased. 2. The court held that the accused did not intend to cause death of the deceased by firing or knew that by this act of hers she would cause death of the deceased, as there was no evidence to suggest that she aimed at the deceased or fired at the party with the deliberate intention of causing death to her or to any one of them. 3. The court found that the accused had committed an offence under Section 304A, Penal Code, for causing death by rash and negligent act, as her act of firing from the rifle in the way she did with the full knowledge of the children and others nearabout was a rash and negligent act, which, although does not amount to culpable homicide, brings her within the mischief of Section 304-A, Penal Code.
Final Decision: The court convicted the accused under Section 304A, Penal Code, and sentenced her to the period of imprisonment of four months undergone by her and also to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months. The entire fine, if paid, shall be paid as compensation to P.W. 2, the mother of the deceased.
Goswami, C.J. :- This appeal is against the judgment of conviction under Section 302, Penal Code, and sentence of imprisonment for life. The accused (Mrs. Meera Puri) is the wife of a certain Major in 10 Assam Rifles described as Major Puri, stationed at Mokokchung in Nagaland.
2. The prosecution case is briefly as follows : On 4th April, 1969, at about 5.00 p.m., the deceased Miss Alemnaro Ao, a young girl of about ten years of age, was going by the circular road at Mokokchung with her mother Mrs. Asangla Ao (P.W. 2), her about Miss Amenla Ao (P.W. 4) and her two cousins, who were the daughters of Obangtemjen Ao (P.W. 1). P.W. 1 has married the sister of P.Ws. 2 and 4. This small party walking by the road saw some edible leaves below the road and the children went down to pick these up. At this time, two ladies were seen in the compound of Major Puri's house at a short distance from the hospital road which is at a higher level than the house situated on a slope of a hill. The area is hilly. The two ladies came down to the corner of their compound and shouted "Jao Jao". After that, two dogs came barking at them. Some earth was pelted at the dogs by the mother. The mother also called back the children to return. As the party was about to return, a 'Thak' sound of a gunfire was heard and when they looked towards the side from which the sound was coming, they saw the accused lowering down a gun. The deceased was hit by a bullet and she immediately gave out that "Mother, out of the two ladies the younger one has shot me". The daughter was picked up by the mother and P.W. 4 was sent to report to P.W. 1. He came within about fifteen minutes and took the child to the military hospital, where however there was no doctor available and in an army vehicle she was brought to the civil hospital where the doctors treated her. The small child died two days after on 6th April, 1969 at 9.00 a.m. On the above facts, the accused stands charged under S. 302, Penal Code for committing murder by intentionally or knowingly causing the death of Alemnaro Ao by firing at her with a. 22 bore rifle.
3. Prosecution has examined sixteen witnesses, out of which P.Ws. 2, 4, 10 and 11 are the eye witnesses to the occurrence. Prosecution rests on their evidence as also on a statement of the deceased recorded by the doctor Longri Ao (P.W. 3) prior to her death. The statement is marked as Ext. P-3. Prosecution also examined Dr. L. M. Murry (P.W. 5) who found on post-mortem examination one perforated wound on the left iliac fossa 1 1/2" medial to the left illi chest and another perforated wound at the back on the tip of the left 12th rib. There was no charring or blackening at or near the wound. On internal examination, he found small perforation in the small intestine at four places and one perforation in the large intestine. There was a tear in mesentery which had torn several mesentery vessels. There was also a perforating would at the psoas muscle on the left side Blood had collected in the peritoneal cavity. The first perforating wound was through and through and it corresponded to the second perforating wound at the back. No bullet was found inside the body. The size of the wound was quite small and he is not quite sure whether it could be caused by 22 bore bullet. He however opined that the injury was caused by some small bore fire arm. In his opinion, death was caused due to intra peritoneal bleeding with generalised peritonitis causing circulatory failure and in the ordinary course it was sufficient to cause death. In cross-examination he states that he has not given the measurements of the wounds. The back wound was about 4" higher in leave than the front wound. He himself has fire arm and he knows its use.
4. Mr. N. Jauhari (P.W. 9) is the Assistant Director of Central Forensic Laboratory cum Assistant Chemical Examiner to the Government of India in Calcutta. He is the Ballistic Expert to whom the rifle which was produced by the husband of the
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
