Back
High Court of Madhya Pradesh
Sujoy Paul, Prakash Chandra Gupta, JJ.
ASHISH s/o BRIJRAJ CHATURVEDI – APPELLANT
Versus
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – RESPONDENT
Cri. Appeal No. 698 of 2011
Decided On : 18-08-2022
CRIMINAL APPEAL - SECTION 302, 498-A IPC - MURDER - CRUELTY - DYING DECLARATION - INSANITY - SECTION 84 IPC - SECTION 300 IPC - FOURTH EXCEPTION TO MURDER - SECTION 498-A IPC - ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS - EVIDENCE - ASSESSMENT.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for the murder of his wife and sentenced to life imprisonment. He was also convicted under section 498-A of the IPC for cruelty to his wife and sentenced to two years' imprisonment. The appellant appealed against his conviction and sentence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellant had intentionally caused the death of his wife by pouring kerosene on her and setting her on fire. The court also found that the appellant had not established that he was insane at the time of the incident and was therefore not entitled to the defense of insanity under section 84 of the IPC. The court further found that the appellant had not committed any cruelty to his wife as defined in section 498-A of the IPC.
Issues: 1. Whether the appellant was guilty of murder under section 302 of the IPC. 2. Whether the appellant was entitled to the defense of insanity under section 84 of the IPC. 3. Whether the appellant was guilty of cruelty to his wife under section 498-A of the IPC.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the appellant was guilty of murder under section 302 of the IPC because he had intentionally caused the death of his wife by pouring kerosene on her and setting her on fire. 2. The court held that the appellant was not entitled to the defense of insanity under section 84 of the IPC because he had not established that he was insane at the time of the incident. 3. The court held that the appellant was not guilty of cruelty to his wife under section 498-A of the IPC because he had not committed any cruelty to her as defined in that section.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal in part. The conviction and sentence under section 498-A of the IPC was set aside and the appellant was acquitted of that offense. The conviction and sentence under section 302 of the IPC was affirmed.
JUDGMENT PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA, J. : – Appellant/accused has filed this appeal under section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as CrPC), being aggrieved by the judgment dated 26-2-2011, passed in Session Trial No. 254/2008 by the learned third Additional Sessions Judge Satna, whereby the appellant has been convicted under section (hereinafter referred to as u/s) 302 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as IPC) and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 500/- with default stipulation of additional rigorous imprisonment of 3 months and has also been convicted for the offence under section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of 2 years and fine of Rs. 500/- with default stipulation of additional rigorous imprisonment for 3 months.
2. It is admitted fact that marriage of deceased Ashwini Chaturvedi alias Sandhya was solemnized with accused Ashish Chaturvedi approximately 10 years prior to the occurrence of incident. After marriage one daughter (Shivanshi 5 years) and one son (Krishna Kant 3 years) were born from their wedlock. It is an undisputed fact that deceased Ashwini Chaturvedi alias Sandhya has died due to burn injuries.
3. The facts necessary to be stated for disposal of instant appeal are that on 20-7-2008 at 02:20 p.m., Dr. A. K. Trivedi (PW/6) admitted deceased Ashwini Chaturvedi alias Sandhya, resident of Krishna Nagar, Satna for treatment of her being burnt and brought by her husband/accused Ashish Chaturvedi at District Hospital, Satna. He had sent information (Ex.P/12) to SHO/Police Chowki District Hospital Satna. He also examined the victim and gave an MLC report (Ex.P/11). Looking to the serious condition of deceased Monika Chaturvedi (PW/8) (Sister-in-law of deceased) took her to Birla Hospital Satna. Dr. Rekha Maheshwari admitted her in the Birla Hospital and sent an information to P/S Kolgawan District Satna. On the basis of aforementioned intimation ASI G. S. Pandey (PW/5) wrote a roznamcha sanha No. 1444. On the basis of request letter of ASI G. S. Pandey (PW/5), on 20-7-2008 Executive Magistrate/Naib Tahsildar Raghuraj Nagar, Satna, Prabhat Mishra (PW/7) went to Birla Hospital, Satna. On the same day at 07:45 p.m. Dr. S. Singh examined the victim, Ashwini Chaturvedi and found that she was in fit condition to give statement. Prabhat Mishra (PW/7) wrote statement (Ex.P/13) of deceased Ashwini Chaturvedi during 7:45 p.m. to 08:00 p.m. In the statement (Ex/P-13) deceased stated that appellant poured kerosene on her body and set her ablaze at 01:30 p.m. on 20-7-2008.
4. On the same day ASI G. S. Pandey (PW/5) wrote statements of deceased Ashwini Chaturvedi, Monika Chaturvedi (PW/8), Father of accused Brijraj Kumar (DW/4), uncle of deceased Ramashray Tiwari (PW/2) and brother of deceased Vinod Tiwari.
5. On 20-7-2008 at 10:30 p.m. ASI G. S. Pandey (PW/5) lodged an FIR (Ex.P/7) against appellant/accused Ashish Chaturvedi. On 21-7-2008, father of deceased Radhika Prasad (PW/1) gave a written complaint (Ex.P/1) to SHO Kolgawan District Satna. During investigation at 11:30 AM on 21-7-2008 ASI G. S. Pandey (PW/5) inspected the place of incident i.e. house of appellant/accused, at the presence of witnesses and prepared spot map (Ex.P/3). At 12:00 a.m. he seized semi-burnt saree and piece of petticoat of deceased, collected sample of kerosene from floor through cotton ball, a simple cotton ball, a matchstick, a gallon of kerosene containing approx. 2 litres of kerosene and prepared seizure memo (Ex.P/4). On the same day he arrested the appellant vide arrest memo (Ex.P/8).
6. For the better treatment on 22-7-2008 deceased was shifted to Roy Hospital Kamptee District Nagpur Maharashtra. After admission of deceased an intimation was sent to SHO Kamptee by Roy Hospital where roznamcha sanha no 4/8 was written. Head Constable (hereinafter as HC) Kamptee wrote a letter to the Medical Officer of Roy hospital about the men
The essential elements of the offense of cruelty under section 498-A of the IPC are: (a) the woman must be married; (b) she must be subjected to cruelty or harassment; and (c) such cruelty or harassm....
The presumption of innocence is reinforced by an acquittal, and the prosecution must provide compelling evidence to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, especially in cases involving conflicting dyin....
The admissibility and reliability of dying declarations, the influence of intoxication on criminal actions, and the requirement of evidence for specific charges.
Dying declarations were deemed reliable for conviction; conviction for murder upheld due to sufficient corroboration and intent established.
The court confirmed that a dying declaration can be the sole basis for conviction if found credible, and the intentional act of setting a spouse ablaze constitutes murder, not mere culpable homicide.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on the dying declaration and oral evidence to prove the accused's instigation and cruelty, leading to the finding of guilt for both ch....
The dying declaration was the sole basis for conviction, and the distinction between 'murder' and 'culpable homicide not amounting to murder' under Section 299 and 300 of the Indian Penal Code was cr....
The court held that mere admonishment and lack of credible evidence regarding dowry demand do not satisfy the statutory definition of cruelty under Section 498-A of IPC.
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
