2009 Supreme(UK) 455

2010 (1) N.C.C. 154
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dalveer Bhandari and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Harjit Singh Bedi
Criminal Appeal No. 1199 of 2001
STATE OF U.P. – Appellant
Versus
SANTOSH KUMAR & ORS. – Respondents
Decided on : 03.09.2009

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sec. 302 — Offence — Acquittal — Legality of — The High Court, entitled to re-appreciate the entire evidence in appeal — But in doing so the High Court could not ignore the vital features of the prosecution evidence — The High Court has given no reasons for setting aside a well reasoned judgment of the trial court and acquitted the accused u/s 302 IPC — The entire prosecution case hinges on the three dying declarations made by the deceased — On careful analysis of these dying declarations, it leads to only one conclusion that respondent after beating deceased poured kerosene oil on her and set her on fire — And that she died because of burn injuries sustained by her — Deceased having made three consistent statements i.e. dying declarations to Tehsildar — On certification of doctor, deceased was in a fit mental condition to give statement — The dying declaration given by deceased when she was having acute pain minor inconsistencies in one dying declaration with another should not render such dying declarations void — Same must be construed in proper perspective — Judgment of High Court setting aside well reasoned judgment of conviction, rendered by trial Court and recording that of acquittal instead — Found not sustainable.

        (Paras 21 to 30, 45)

       (B) Appreciation of Evidence — In Criminal case, where statements are recorded after a considerable lapse of time, some inconsistencies are bound to occur — But it is the duty of the court to ensure that the truth prevails — If on material particulars, the statements of prosecution witnesses are consistent — Then they cannot be discarded only because of minor inconsistencies. (Para 28)

       (C) Related Witness — Acceptability of — While appreciating the evidence — The courts must also consider the fact carefully as to why would the father of the deceased falsely implicate only one of the members of the family and let go the real culprit — At that juncture, usual anxiety is to ensure that the real assailant must be punished.

        (Para 28)

       (D) Indian Penal Code, 1860, Secs. 304-B, 498-A and Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Secs. 3, 4 — High Court's finding that when the charge u/s 304-B IPC could not be proved — Then conviction u/s 498-A IPC and secs. 3 and 4 of the Dowry Act also cannot be sustained — This approach of the High Court, erroneous and unsustainable — The legal position is absolutely clear that a person charged and acquitted u/s 304-B can be convicted u/s 498-A IPC — (1991) 1 SCC 371 relied.

        (Paras 30 to 38)

       (E) Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sec. 304-B — Dowry Death — Essentials of — (i) that the accused caused death of a woman — (ii) that the accused was husband, or any relative of the husband of that woman — (iii) death of such woman — (a) was caused by any burns, or bodily injury, or — (b) occurred otherwise than under normal circumstances — (iv) such death was caused within seven years of the marriage of that woman — (v) soon before her death such woman was subjected to cruelty, or harassment — (vi) the accused had subjected such woman to such cruelty or harassment for, or in connection with any demand for dowry.

        (Para 32)

       (F) Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sec. 498-B — Subjecting to cruelty — Essentials of — (i) that there was a married woman — (ii) that such woman was subjected to cruelty — (iii) that such cruelty consisted of any willful conduct of such nature as was likely to drive such woman to commit suicide — Or to cause grave injury or danger to her life, limb or health, whether mental or physical — Harassment of such woman where such harassment was with a view to coercing such woman or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security — Or on account of failure by such woman, or any person related to her to meet the unlawful demand in able and the woman was subjected to such cruelty by the husband of that woman; or any relative of the husband of that woman. (Para 34)

       (G) Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Secs. 3, 4 and IPC, 1860, Sec. 304B — Scope of — Sec. 3 of Dowry Act deals with penalty for giving and taking of dowry — Sec. 4 of Dowry Act deals with penalty for demanding dowry — Object of Sec. 4 is to discourage the very demand for property or valuable security as consideration for a marriage between the parties thereto — Thus, ambit and scope of Secs. 3 and 4 of Dowry Act is different from the ambit and scope of Sec. 498-A IPC. (Paras 38 to 42)

       (H) Constitution of India, 1950, Art. 136 — Reversing the order of acquittal — Consideration — Supreme Court has always been slow in dealing with reversal of order of acquittal — Particularly, in a case where the other view is possible or plausible. (Para 46)

       ¼v½ Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk] 1860] /kkjk 302 ds vUrxZr vijk/k ls nks"keqfDr dh oSèkkfudrk dks pqukSrh nh xbZ & vihy esa mPp U;k;ky; dks lEiw.kZ lk{; dk iquewZY;kadu dk vf/kdkj fn;k x;k Fkk & ijUrq ,slk djrs le; mPp U;k;ky; vfHk;kstu i{k ds egRoiw.kZ lk{; dks vuns[kk ugha dj ldrh Fkh & mPp U;k;ky; }kjk fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds Bksl vkSj lgh fu.kZ; dks jn~n djrs le; dksbZ dkj.k ugha fn;k tk ldrk vkSj /kkjk 302 vk ih lh ds vfHk;qDr dks nks"keqDr dj fn;k & lEiw.kZ dsl vfHk;kstu }kjk izLrqr e`rd ds rhu e`R;qdkyhu c;kuksa ij vk/kkfjr gS & bu e`R;qdkyhu c;kuksa dk lko/kkuh iwoZd foospu djus ij ek= ,d ifj.kke ij igq¡pk tkrk gS fd mRrjnkrk }kjk e`rdk dks ihVus ds ckn ml ij feêh dk rsy Mkyk x;k vkSj vkx yxk nh xbZ vkSj mldh e`R;q tyus ds dkj.k yxh pksVksa ls gqbZ Fkh & e`rdk }kjk yxkrkj rhu c;ku fn;s x;s ;kuh e`R;qdkyhu c;ku rglhynkj dks fn;s x;s & MkDVj ds izek.k i= ds vk/kkj ij e`rdk c;ku nsus dh mi;qDr fLFkfr esa Fkh & e`rdk }kjk Hk;kud nnZ gksus dh n'kk esa fn;k x;k e`R;qdkyhu c;ku esa rfud lh fHkérk dk gksus ij nwljs c;ku dh rqyuk esa ,sls c;ku dks voS/kkfud djkj ugha fn;k tk ldrk & mfpr ifjis{; esa nksuksa dh ,d lh O;k[;k dh tkuh pkfg, & mPp U;k;ky; dk fu.kZ;] fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds ,d Bksl fu.kZ; dks jn~n djus okyk fu.kZ; ftl esa nks"kflf) dks nks"keqfDr esa cnyk x;k mi;qDr ugha ekuk x;kA

        ¼izLrj 21 ls 30] 45½

       ¼c½ lk{; dk vf/kewY;kadu & fdlh vijkf/kd dsl esa tgk¡ c;ku dkQh yEcs le; ds mijkUr ntZ fd;s tkrs gSa rks mu esa dqN fHkérk gksuk LokHkkfod gS & ijUrq ;g U;k;ky; dk nkf;Ro gS fd og ;g ns[ks fd lPpkbZ D;k gS & ;fn Bksl rF;ksa ds vkèkkj ij vfHk;kstu i{k ds lk{kh ds c;ku ,d tSls gSa rks mUgsa ekewyh fHkérk ds dkj.k udkjk ugha tk ldrkA ¼izLrj 28½

       ¼l½ lEcU/kh lk{kh dh xzkárk & tc lk{; dks U;k;ky; }kjk Lohdkj fd;k tk, rks mls bl rF; dks lko/kkuhiwoZd voyksfdr djuk pkfg, fd e`rdk dk firk ifjokj ds ,d lnL; dks >wBk dsl esa D;ksa Qalkrk vkSj okLrfod vijk/kh dks NksM+ nsrk & ,sls volj ij lkekU; ftKklk ;g fuf'pr djus dks gksrh gS fd okLrfod vfHk;qDr dks nf.Mr fd;k tkuk visf{kr gSA ¼izLrj 28½

       ¼n½ Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk] 1860] /kkjk 304B, 498A vkSj ngst ifj"ks/k vf/kfu;e] 1961] /kkjk 3] 4 & mPp U;k;ky; }kjk ;g fu.kZ; fn;k x;k fd tc /kkjk 304B ds vUrxZr vkjksi fl) u gks lds rc /kkjk 498A vk ih lh vkSj ngst vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 3@4 ds vUrxZr nks"kflf) Hkh dk;e ugha jg ldrh & mPp U;k;ky; dk ;g fu.kZ; v'kq) gS vkSj fVdkÅ ugha jgus ;ksX; gS dkuwuh fLFkfr fcYdqy Li"V gS fd dksbZ O;fDr /kkjk 304B vk ih lh ds vUrxZr vkjksfir gqvk vkSj nks"keqDr gks x;k rks og /kkjk 498A vk ih lh ds vUrxZr nf.Mr fd;k tk ldrk gS & (1991) 1 SCC 371 ij vk/kkfjrA

        ¼izLrj 30 ls 38½

       ¼;½ Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk] 1860] /kkjk 304 B & ngst gR;k & bl ds fy, vko';d rRo (i) vfHk;qDr }kjk efgyk dh e`R;q dh xbZ Fkh (ii) vfHk;qDr mldk ifr Fkk vFkok efgyk ds ifr dk dksbZ fj'rsnkj Fkk (iii) ml efgyk dh e`R;q (a) tyus ls ;k 'kkjhfjd fdlh pksV ls gqbZ Fkh (b) lk/kkj.k ifjfLFkfr ls i`Fkd vU; fdlh izdkj ls gqbZ Fkh (iv) efgyk dh 'kknh ds lkr lkyksa ds Hkhrj e`R;q gqbZ Fkh (v) e`R;q ls iwoZ ml efgyk dks izrkM+uk nh xbZ Fkh (vi) vfHk;qDr }kjk ml efgyk dks ngst dh ekax ds lEcU/k esa izrkM+uk nh xbZ FkhA ¼izLrj 32½

       ¼j½ Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk] 1860] /kkjk 498B & izrkM+uk fn;s tkus ds fy, vko';d rRo & (i) efgyk fookfgr Fkh (ii) ml efgyk dks izrkM+uk nh xbZ Fkh (iii) ml izrkM+uk dks tkucw> dj bl izdkj tkjh j[kk tk, ftl ls efgyk vkRegR;k djus dks foo'k gks tk, vFkok vius dks xaHkkhj pksV igq¡pk;s vFkok viuh tku dks [krjs esa Mkys ;k fdlh izdkj ls vius fdlh vax dks ;k LokLF; dks ekufld vFkok HkkSfrd :i ls [krjs esa Mkys & tc ;g izrkM+uk efgyk dks cy iwoZd nsus ds bjkns ls vFkok mlls lEcU/k j[kus okys fdlh O;fDr }kjk voS/kkfud ekax lEifRr vFkok dherh izfrHkwfr ds lEcU/k esa fd;k tk, vFkok ml efgyk ls vlQy jgus ds dkj.k vFkok vU; dksbZ O;fDr tks mlls lEcfU/kr gks] voS/k ekax iw.kZ u gksus ij ml efgyk ds ifr }kjk mls izrkfM+r fd;k tk, ;k mlds fdlh fj'rsnkj }kjk izrkfM+r fd;k tk,A ¼izLrj 34½

       ¼y½ ngst ifj"ks/k vf/kfu;e] 1961] /kkjk 3@4 vkSj Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk] 1860] èkkjk 304B dk foLrkj & /kkjk 3 ngst vf/kfu;e esa ngst nsus vkSj ysus ds fy, n.M nsus ls lEcfU/kr gS vkSj /kkjk 4 ngst dh ek¡x djus ij fn;s tkus okys n.M ls lEcfUèkr gS & /kkjk 4 dk mn~ns'; lEifRr vFkok dherh lkeku dh ek¡x i{kdkjksa ds e/; 'kknh ds izfrQy ds fy, djus dks grksRlkfgr djuk gS & bl izdkj /kkjk 3@4 ngst vf/kfu;e dh ifjf/k vkSj foLrkj /kkjk 498A vk ih lh ls fHké gSA

        ¼izLrj 38 ls 42½

       ¼o½ Hkkjrh; lafo/kku] 1950] vuqPNsn 136 & nks"keqfDr ds vkns'k dks iyVuk & vkSj ml ij fopkj fd;k tkuk & mPpre U;k;ky; lnSo nks"keqfDr ds vkns'k dks iyVus esa /khek jgk gS fo'ks"kr% ml dsl esa tgk¡ ij vU; fopkj lEHko vFkok lR; izrhr gksus okyk gksA ¼izLrj 46½