Back
High Court Of Himachal Pradesh
V.P.BHATNAGAR,BHAWANI SINGH
RAI SINGH - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 189 of 1989
Decided On : 08/07/1991
CRIMINAL LAW - MURDER - SECTION 302 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE - SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE - CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE - BURDEN OF PROOF - MOTIVE - PRESENCE OF ALCOHOL AND ORGANO-PHOSPHORUS COMPOUND IN VISCERA - INTERPRETATION OF CHEMICAL EXAMINER'S REPORT - CONDUCT OF ACCUSED AFTER INCIDENT - RELIABILITY OF WITNESSES' TESTIMONIES.
Fact of the Case:
Rai Singh, an Indian Army employee, was convicted of murdering his wife, Veena Rani, by burning her to death. The prosecution alleged that Rai Singh had illicit relations with his sister-in-law, Veena Kumari, and that he killed Veena Rani out of hatred and to avoid paying back a loan he had taken from her maternal uncle. The defense argued that Veena Rani committed suicide due to marital problems and that the prosecution's evidence was insufficient to prove murder.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. It held that the evidence of motive was weak and that the presence of alcohol and organo-phosphorus compound in Veena Rani's viscera did not necessarily indicate murder. The court also found that Rai Singh's conduct after the incident, such as informing the village and his father-in-law about the death and not tampering with the evidence, suggested his innocence.
Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution had proved the motive for the murder. 2. Whether the presence of alcohol and organo-phosphorus compound in Veena Rani's viscera was sufficient to establish murder. 3. Whether Rai Singh's conduct after the incident indicated his guilt or innocence.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the prosecution had failed to prove a strong motive for Rai Singh to murder his wife. The evidence of illicit relations with his sister-in-law was not reliable, and the other alleged motives, such as financial disputes and marital problems, were too weak to support a conviction for murder. 2. The court held that the presence of alcohol and organo-phosphorus compound in Veena Rani's viscera did not necessarily indicate murder. The Chemical Examiner had not quantified the amount of these substances, and there was no evidence of poisoning. The court also noted that Veena Rani may have consumed alcohol-based medicine before the incident. 3. The court held that Rai Singh's conduct after the incident, such as informing the village and his father-in-law about the death and not tampering with the evidence, suggested his innocence. The court found no evidence to support the prosecution's claim that Rai Singh was trying to cover up a crime.
Final Decision: The court allowed Rai Singh's appeal and acquitted him of the murder charge.
V.P. Bhatnagar, J.—Accused Rai Singh and Kartar Singh, who are real brothers, were tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (II), Kangra at Dharamshala, for having committed offences under sections 302 and 498-A read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code for cruelty and for having murdered Veena Rani wife of Rai Singh on 2-5-1986. The learned trial Court, by Its judgment dated 7-7-1Q89, acquitted both the accused for the offence under section 49R-A of the Indian Penal Code. It further acquitted accused Kartar Singh of the offence under section 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code but convicted Rai Singh under section 302 and sentenced him to life imprisonment He was also ordered to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000 and in default of payment of fine to undergo further imprisonment for a period of six months- Aggrieved from the aforesaid order of conviction and sentence, Rai Singh preferred the present appeal.
2. After hearing arguments on 26-4-1991 we made a brief order accepting the appeal and directed that the appellant be released forthwith for reasons to be recorded. We proceed now to record the reasons accordingly.
3. The prosecution case may now be stated In brief.
4. It is not disputed that Veena Rani whose burnt dead-body was found at a distance of about 300 metres from her house in village Chanaur in a waste Kharetar land on 2-5-1986 had been married to Rai Singh on 8-2-1982 Both of them had a son aged two years from the wedlock. Veena Rani had done her Higher Secondary School Examination and also had a diploma in tailoring course. Rai Singh was employed in the Indian Army.
5. On the day of occurrence viz, 2-5-1986 Veena Kumari wife of accused Kartar Singh was arranging the bed of her brother-in-law Rai Singh in the morning when she found two chits Ex P-14 and Ex. P-15 and the golden ear rings of Veena Rani there. The chits contained writings in the hand of Veena Rani to the effect that she was going to end her life and that nobody should be held responsible for it A little earlier at about
6. 45 a m., she had complained of back-ache to her husband. Rai Singh is stated to have told her that he would take her to the doctor after finishing his shave. He then saw Veena Rani going towards Kharetar land and thought that she was probably going to answer the call of nature. The contents of the chits, however, put him on the alert and he proceeded in search of Veena Rani end ultimately found her burnt body at a distance of about 300 metres from the house in the Kharetar land. He returned to the village and informed every-one about it. President, Gram Panchayat. Abhinash Chander (PW 14) then proceeded to the spot and he also saw the burnt body of Veena Rani, He then wrote a Ruqa Ex. P-16 and sent it to the police through a messenger Head-constable Karnail Singh (PW 18) recorded the report Ex. P-l in the Daily Diary of Police of Police Post Dehra and thereafter came to the place of occurrence. He prepared the Inquest Reports Ex. P-25 and Ex. P-26. In the meantime, a message had also been sent to Veena Ranis father Parmodh Singh (PW 13) through one Kesru Ram (PW 16). The postmortem examination of the dead-body was performed by Dr. Prem Lata Shukla (PW 2) and Dr B. D. Sharma (PW 3). They found I00% burn injuries on the dead-body and opined that the death bad been caused due to shock by extensive bum injuries. They proved their postmortem report Ex, P-5. The viscera, stomach, intestine liver, spleen and kidney etc were sent to the Chemical Examiner. His report has been introduced into evidence and is at Ex. P-6 According to this report organo-phosphorus compound (an insecticide) and alcohol were found in the viscera The final opinion about the cause of death was given by Dr. B. D. Sharma. It is at Ex. P-7. According to it, the cause of death was due to shock caused by extensive burns and contributed by the presence of alcohol and organo-phosporus compound, 6. Sher Singh (PW 1) is the maternal uncle of Veena Rani. He
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
