Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
V. Gopala Gowda, Arun Mishra, JJ.
State of Himachal Pradesh – Appellant
Vs.
Rajiv Jassi – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 771 of 2005
Decided On : 06-05-2016
(b) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 302 – Medical evidence establishing forced poisoning – A number of injuries on body of deceased – Accused alone in the room with deceased – Not explaining the injuries – Section 106, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Conviction by trial court justified. (Para 15,
AIR 1960 SC 7; 1995 Supp (2) SCC 187; AIR 2010 SC 2352 – Relied upon
(c) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 302 – Trial court convicting respondent u/s 302 – High Court wrongly holding that as the trial court did not convict respondent u/s 498A and 304B, it could not be said that the deceased was being ill-treated or harassed with cruelty on account of dowry although his cruelty fully established by evidence – Further, despite being aware of precarious condition of deceased respondent did not open the door for the neighbours and intentionally delayed taking the victim to the hospital – High Court also discarding evidence of independent witness – Acquittal by High Court not justified. (Para 16, 17, 19)
AIR 1984 SC 1622 – Relied upon
(d) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 302 – Trial court awarding life imprisonment – Accused had kicked womb of deceased who was 8 months pregnant – Foetus recovered from womb – That child, now 17 years old and residing with accused – Plea for leniency – No ground for showing leniency. (Para 22)
Facts of the case:
The respondent was imposed life imprisonment and fine of Rs.5,000 by the trial court which has been reversed by the appellate court.
Finding of the Court:
High Court has gravely erred in reversing the well-reasoned judgment of conviction and order of sentence recorded by the trial court.
Result: Appeal allowed.
JUDGMENT :
Arun Mishra, J.
1. The State is in appeal as against the reversal of the judgment of the trial court acquitting the respondent for commission of the offence under section 302 IPC by committing murder of his wife by way of administering poison. The respondent was imposed life imprisonment and fine of Rs.5,000 by the trial court which has been reversed by the appellate court.
2. The prosecution case in brief is that the respondent Dr. Rajiv was married to Dr. Suman Lata, daughter of Ram Kishan, PW9. The marriage was performed on 25.4.1998. The incident took place on 26.5.2000. At the relevant time deceased was posted as Dental Surgeon at Civil Hospital, Chail, district Solan; whereas the accused was posted as Medical Officer in Primary Health Centre, Gharuan in district Ropar, State of Punjab.
3. Prosecution has alleged that the relationship between the deceased and the accused became estranged due to demand of dowry and excessive drinking habit of accused. Under the influence of liquor he used to beat the deceased. On 23.5.2000 Anil Kumar, PW 8 brother visited the deceased at Chail and stayed with her. In the intervening night of 25th and 26th May, 2000 the accused reached Chail where deceased was residing. He was drunk and started abusing, kicking and beating the deceased. When Anil Kumar tried to intervene he was also beaten by the accused and was turned out of the house. On 26.5.2000 at about 3 a.m., Surender Kumar, PW 5 came out for urination when he heard the shrieks and cries of the deceased and extreme weeping of her child. The deceased was crying “Give me salty water. I do not want to die.” Surender Kumar went to the house of the deceased. It was closed from inside. He informed Ved Prakash, PW 4 Ex-President of Chail Gram Panchayat as well as Om Prakash PW 7. All three of them went to the house of the deceased. Ved Prakash knocked the door of the house which was bolted from inside. None opened the door for sometime, after about 5 minutes door was opened by the accused. On entering the room, PWs.4, 5 and 7 smelt poisonous odour in the room. The articles in the room were scattered. The deceased was lying on the bed having bruises and contusions on her face. Water was splashed on the bed as well as on the floor of the room. The clothes of the deceased were also drenched. PW 5 asked the accused to take the deceased to the hospital immediately. However the accused replied that there was no necessity therefor and that deceased would be all right very soon.
4. Prosecution has alleged that in the meantime Dayal Singh, PW 6, Anil Kumar, PW-8 and Shiv Kumar, PW-10 also arrived. They noticed the condition of the room and also the precarious and deteriorating condition of the deceased. When they asked the accused what had happened, he retorted that it was his private life and they need not bother. The accused refused to take the deceased to the hospital on the pretext that nothing had happened and he himself being a doctor could look after her. PWs.6, 8 and 10 also smelt poisonous odour in the room. Deceased was crying that she did not want to die and she be saved. On being asked what had happened, she raised her hand towards the accused. Om Prakash, PW-7 informed the police at about 4.30 a.m. On that Biru Ahmad, PW-17 entered the information in the daily diary and proceeded towards the spot. He found the deceased lying on the bed in an unconscious position. Dr. O.P. Choudhary, PW-2, examined the deceased at about 6 a.m. and noted the patient was semi-conscious with history of consumption of poisonous substance. He also noted (i) contusion reddish in colour over the lateral side of the right eye brow with swelling present of the size of 7 cm. x 5 cm. and (ii) both lips were swollen. It was also noted that complete examination of the body could not be done because patient was in serious condition. B.P. was not recordable and Pupils bilateral circular, pin point not reacting to light.
5. PW-2 administered the initial treatment.
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
