IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment dated 14th May 2010 Crl. Appeal No.2/2001 # Rehmat Begum ..... Appellant Through : Mr. Ajay Digpal, Adv. Versus State (NCT of Delhi) .... Respondent Through : Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether the Judgment should be reported in the Digest? G.S. SISTANI, J. (ORAL) 1. Crl.Appeal No.1/2001 was filed by the husband of the deceased. Crl.Appeal No.2/2001 has been filed by the mother-in-law of the deceased. By a common judgment dated 09.12.2000 and order on conviction dated 18.12.2000 both the husband and mother-in-law have been held guilty for the offence committed under Sections 498-A and 304-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as, “IPC”). Both the mother-in-law and husband have been sentenced to undergo seven (07) years of Rigorous Imprisonment for the offence under Section 304-B of the IPC. The husband and mother-in-law have been sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for three (03) years under Section 498-A, IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, each, and in default thereof they have been directed to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment of six months. The present appeal has been filed by the mother-in-law and is directed against the aforesaid judgement and order of conviction. 2. The facts as noticed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, necessary for the disposal of the present appeal, is that on 28.09.1998 at about 3:40 a.m., information was received by the Police Post, Turqman Gate, which was recorded vide DD No.3 to the effect that Sayara Bano (wife of Rizwanuddin), was admitted in the hospital by one Kayamuddin with burn injuries. Investigation of the case was marked to SI Subodh Kant who went to LNJP Hospital along with HC Anil Dutt and Constable Surya Kant and collected the MLC of the deceased. At the Police Post, SI Surya Kant met Smt. Rauf Nisha, mother of the deceased, and recorded her statement at about 8:30 a.m. In her statement, mother of the deceased informed that Sayara Bano (deceased) was her eldest daughter and was married about eighteen (18) months ago to Rizwanuddin. After her marriage, deceased used to come to her parents‟ house almost every Sunday and would complain that her mother-in-law, Rehmat taunted her on small things and would say “Tumne Dahej Me Diya Kya Hai, Kabare Ka Maal. Itwar Bazar Ka De Diya Hai, Jo Is Ghar Me Rakhane Layak Hi Nai Hai”. Mother of the deceased informed the police that Rizwanuddin used to come late after consuming liquor almost every day and would beat Sayara. Mother of the deceased also stated that she along with her Jethani-Smt. Salma (wife of Iqbal Ahmed), had gone to meet the mother-in-law and husband of her daughter with a view to advice them and talk to them about the grievance of Sayara, however, both of them misbehaved, abused and told them that in case she wanted her daughter to be happy, she should meet the requirements of her in-laws and pay Rs.25,000/-. Mother of the deceased also informed the police that Fifteen (15) days prior to her death, Sayara had come to her house weeping and told them that she was being harassed by her husband and mother-in-law as the payment of Rs.25,000/- was not made till then. Thereafter, mother of the deceased had gone to the house of the appellant along with Miraz, (son of her sister) and had met the appellants and assured them that Rs.25,000/- would be paid soon and left her daughter in her in-laws house. The mother of the deceased had learnt about the admission of her daughter in LNJP Hospital in a burnt condition at 3:00 a.m. from Papo, sister of Rehmat, and she reached the hospital at about 3:30 a.m. where she found her daughter lying in the hospital with burn injuries. On the basis of the statement of the mother of the deceased, an FIR was registered. 3. During trial, twenty one (21) witnesses were examined by the prosecution. Four (4) witnesses were examined by the defence. Statement of the appellants was also recorded under section 313 of Cr.P.C. It would be useful to discuss the evidence of some of the material witnesses in detail. 4. PW-1, Mohd. Arif (neighbour of appellants) deposed in his examination- in-chief that it was a Sunday, but he did not remember the date. About 3/4 months back, at about 1:30 a.m., he was present at his house. He heard some voices and came to the portion of Rizwan. He saw Sayara in flames (who was the wife of Rizwan). PW-1 deposed that he put water on Sayara from a tub lying there. At that time, the family members of Rizwan, were sleeping in the house. He called the family members, who were sleeping on the lower floor of the house and took Sayara to the hospital. PW-1 deposed that he did not know anything else about this case. 5. In the cross-examination by learned APP, PW-1 deposed that his statement was recorded by the police. He admitted that the incident took place on 28.9.1998. PW-1 also deposed that it was incorrect that when Sayara was seen by him in flames, at that time, Rizwanuddin and his mother, Rehmat, were standing there. Further, it was incorrect that he saw a white can in the hand of Rizwanuddin. PW-1 deposed that he had not stated so in his statement to the police. PW-1 was confronted with portion C of his statement, Ex.PW/1-A where it was so recorded. PW-1 also deposed that it was incorrect that he had been won over by the appellant. 6. In his cross-examination by counsel for appellant, PW-1 deposed that Rizwan and deceased, Sayara, were residing together on the second floor of the house and were having separate kitchen and the appellant, Rehmat (mother of Rizwan) and other family members were residing on the ground floor of the house. PW-1 further deposed that there was a very thin wall between his house and the house of Rizwanuddin and they could hear the talks of each other from their respective portions. He had never heard any dispute or quarrel between Sayara Bano and her in-laws including her husband. He also did not hear any quarrel on the day of the incident or immediately few days prior to the occurrence. There was no neighbour present at the place of occurrence. 7. PW-3, Rauf Nisha, mother of the deceased (w/o Intzar Ahmed) deposed that the marriage of her daughter, Sayara Bano took place with Rizwanuddin, about 2 years back. PW-3 deposed: My daughter was kept well by Rizwanuddin for 2/3 months after the marriage. Whenever my daughter used to come to reside with us normally on Sunday, she used to complain to me that her mother-in-law, Rehmat was not happy with the dowry brought by her and she used to taunt every time by saying that junk has been given in the dowry. (Kabari Ka Saman Diya Hai). My daughter also used to complain that her husband, Rizwanuddin used to consume liquor every day and after consuming liquor he used to bear her daily with a view to pressurize her to bring money from her parents. About 4 months prior to the incident, I accompanied by my Jethani (sister-in-law), Salma had gone to the house of appellants. There, we were abused by appellants and were turned out of the house. They had also stated that in case we wanted to see our daughter alive, we should fulfill their demands and they also demanded Rs.25000/- from me which I paid to my daughter Sayaro Bano for handing over the same to her husband, namely Rizwanuddin. Again thereafter, my daughter complained to me that appellants are again harassing her for bringing more dowry from us. About 15 days prior to the incident, my daughter, Sayara Bano, again came to meet us on Sunday and she again complained that the appellants were demanding Rs.25000/- and a flat. I had gone to meet my daughter Sayara Bano at her in-laws house in between the period of 15 days alongwith my nephew Miraj. I again met Rizwanuddin and Rehmat but they did not even care to hear. At about 3:00 a.m. on 28th of the month I was informed by Papo, sister of Rehmat that my daughter Sayara Bano has been burnt and she has been taken to JPN Hospital. I then went to JPN Hospital and there I found that my daughter has sustained burn injuries. My statement was recorded by the police as well as by Magistrate. My statement is Ex.PW-3/A which bears my signature at point-A. The statement before the SDM by me is Ex.PW-3/B which bears my thumb impression and signature at point-A. 8. PW-3, mother of the deceased in her cross-examination by counsel for the appellants deposed: It was correct that the kitchen of my daughter Sayara Bano and her husband was separate from Rehmat. It is also correct that my daughter and her husband, Rizwanuddin used to reside on the second floor of the house. Rehmat with her other 5 sons and 2 daughters have been residing on the first floor of the house. On the ground floor, one Swalin resides. Adjoining to the house of appellants Arif resides on the first floor. I had visited the house of Arif many times. I cannot see what is happening in the house of appellants while remaining present in the house of Arif (PW). I was not tutored by any police officer before coming to the Court before giving the evidence. My daughter was also sick of Rizwanuddin as he used to consume liquor daily and after consuming liquor, he used to beat her. This was the only reason why my daughter was not happy with Rizwanuddin. Vol. in addition to it, she was tired of dowry demand. Whenever, my daughter used to come to our house on Sunday, she used to complain that her husband came too late and used to consume liquor and that her mother in-law used to taunt her with regard to dowry. I had once gone to the house of appellants with my Jethani and on other occasion, I visited the house of appellants with my nephew Miraj. Ques. In your statement Ex.PW3/A you had stated to the police that my daughter came 15 days prior to the occurrence and told me that she was beaten by accused persons as we had not fulfilled the demand of Rs.25000/- and today in the Court you have stated that Rs.25000/- was paid four months prior to her death? Which of is your statement is correct. Ans. My both statements are correct. First of all we paid Rs.25000/- about 4 months prior to the incident and again a sum of Rs.25000/- and a flat was demanded about 15 days prior to the incident by the appellants. I had stated in my statement to the police that the accused persons had told us that in case we wanted to see our daughter alive, the demand of Rs.25000/- should be fulfilled (Confronted with her statement Ex.PW3/A where there is no mention of if we wanted to see our daughter alive.) I had stated in my statement made to the Magistrate that about 15 days prior to the incident, my daughter Sayara Bano came to meet us on Sunday and she again complained that the appellants were demanding Rs.25,000/- and a flat. (Confronted with her statement Ex.PW3/B where there is no mention of any incident about 15 days prior to the incident.) I had no direct talk with Rehmat who is my cousin in connection with the demand of dowry. Rehmat used to demand dowry from my daughter. Rizwanuddin, never demanded any amount or dowry from me directly. It is incorrect to suggest that no demand was ever raised by the accused persons from my daughter. It is incorrect that no amount of Rs.25000/- and flat was ever demanded or paid/given at any time. It is incorrect that I had stated about the demand of Rs.25000/- before the Magistrate on being tutored by somebody in order to falsely implicate the appellants. 9. PW-4, Sh. Mirajuddin @ Miraj, deposed that deceased, Sayara Bano was the daughter of his Khala (Mausi). The marriage of Sayara Bano took place with Rizwanuddin. As per PW-4, whenever Sayara Bano used to come to her parent‟s house, she used to complain that her in-laws were harassing her that she does not know household work and that she had not been taught to do domestic work by her parents and that she was also being taunted as to what type of junk she had brought. She also used to complain that her husband used to consumer liquor, come late in the night and she was not at liberty to go to the place where she wanted to go. PW-4 further deposed that on the eve of Bakri-Id, in 1998, his Khala (the mother of deceased) had sent meat to the matrimonial house of the deceased as per the custom but the appellants had returned the same on the third day as a result of which, his Khala felt very much upset. About 3/4 months prior to the incident he had come to know that Rizwanuddin had demanded Rs.25,000/- and his khala had paid the said amount to her matrimonial house but he could not say to whom the said sum of Rs.25000/- was delivered by his Khala at the house of the appellant. PW-4 stated to not know anything else. 10. In his cross-examination by learned APP, PW-4 deposed that his statement was recorded by the Police and he had not stated to the police that mother-in-law of deceased, Sayara Bano used to taunt the deceased as to what junk had been given by her parents in dowry. (Confronted with his statement, portion A to A of Ex.PW/4-A where it was so recorded). He further deposed that Rizwanuddin, used to come late in the night after consuming liquor and used to beat the deceased. He had not stated to the police that Rizwanuddin used to demand money from the deceased. (Confronted with his statement portion B to B where it was so recorded). He had no knowledge that the deceased Sayara Bano came to her parent‟s home about 15 days prior to the incident and had told that she had been badly beaten by her husband and mother-in-law. (Confronted with his statement Ex.PW/4-A portion C to C where it was so recorded). In his presence, deceased, Sayara Bano, had never told her mother that since Rs.25,000/- had not been given to the accused persons, she was being beaten up by them. He had not made such statement to the police. (Confronted with his statement portion D to D where it was so recorded). PW-4 further deposed that it was incorrect that he alongwith deceased, Sayara Bano and his Khala had gone to the house of appellants. PW-4 deposed that it was incorrect that at that time appellants were assured that Rs.25,000/- would be given to them very soon. (Confronted with his statement portion E to E where it is so recorded). He deposed that it was correct that when he came to know that Sayara Bano had sustained burn injuries, he had gone to JPN Hospital at about 8:00 a.m. on 28.9.1998. When he went to JPN Hospital, he found Sayara Bano in a burnt condition. 11. PW-4 in his cross-examination by the learned APP further deposed that it was correct that deceased, Sayara Bano used to remain upset as she was harassed by the mother-in-law and the husband on account of bringing less dowry as well as for bringing the dowry, goods of very inferior quality (Junk goods). It was correct that deceased, Sayara Bano used to say everytime, when she used to come to her parents home, that she was being harassed and taunted by them for bringing less dowry and for bringing dowry goods of inferior quality. He used to hear the conversation between the deceased and her mother and on one occasion, the deceased had told this fact in his presence to her mother. As per PW-4, it was correct that after her marriage the deceased had become weak as she was constantly taunted but otherwise, the deceased was not suffering from any disease. 12. In the cross examination by learned counsel for the appellant, PW-4 deposed that the deceased used to say that as a result of constant harassment at the hands of her mother-in-law and Nanad, she had become weak. PW-4 deposed that it was incorrect that deceased, Sayara never told in front of him that her in-laws used to harass her and used to say that she does not know household work and that she had not been taught to do domestic work or that she was taunted as to what type of junk she had brought in dowry. It was incorrect that Sayara never complained to him that her husband used to consume liquor and come late in the night. PW-4 had not stated in his statement to the police that deceased, Sayara, used to complain that she was not at liberty to go anywhere as she liked. She had also not stated about the incident of Bakr Id as well as sending meat etc. PW-4 deposed that it was incorrect to suggest that any sum of Rs.25,000/- was given by his Khala to any of the in-laws of deceased, Sayara Bano. It was further incorrect that no demand was made at any time of Rs.25,000/- by Rizwanudddin. It was incorrect that deceased, Sayara, was never harassed or taunted in her in-laws house by any of her in-laws. It was also incorrect that mother-in-law and husband were not responsible for the death of deceased in any manner. 13. PW-5, Salma Begum, deposed that for two-three months after her marriage, Sayara Bano, did not tell them anything but later she informed that her husband, Rizwanudin, used to come to his house after consuming liquor (daily) and beat her and that she was sick of her life. PW-5 further deposed that Sayara Bano also used to say that this fact should not be disclosed by her to anybody else. Deceased Sayara Bano also used to tell her that her mother-in-law harassed her and taunted her by saying that her father had given junk in the dowry. On one occasion, she had gone to the in-laws of Sayara Bano alongwith her Deverani and there the mother-in-law of Sayara Bano had misbehaved with them and had demanded Rs.25,000/- from them. 14. PW-5, in her cross-examination deposed that in fact, deceased, Sayara Bano, had visited her house on the date when the incident took place. i.e. on 26.10.1998 and left her house at 9:00 p.m. They had tried to stop her but she stated that she was in a hurry and had to reach home at the earliest, because if she would reach her home late, a quarrel would take place at her home. As per PW-5, on that day deceased, Sayara Bano had come to her house as a function was being held in connection with the fixing of the date of the marriage of her son. PW-5 deposed that she used to accompany her devarani, sometimes, when they visited her daughter‟s matrimonial home. Latest she had visited the matrimonial house of her daughter about 15 days/one month prior to the incident. At that time the mother of Rizwannuddin, namely Rehmat, met them. PW-5 further deposed in her cross-examintaion that Arif was residing next to the house of Rizwanuddin on the first floor. The stairs of Rizwannuddin and Arif were common upto first floor and thereafter the stairs were different for going to the second floor. When she last visited the matrimonial house of the deceased, appellant, Rehmat, had misbehaved with them and Sayara Bano and her Nanad quarreled with each other on account of cooking of the food. The appellant, however, never demanded any money from them when they visited the matrimonial house. On the last occasion, Sayara Bano told them that her mother-in-law was demanding Rs.25,000/-. PW-5 deposed that it was incorrect to suggest that she had never visited the house of the appellant 15 days/one month prior to the incident or that the appellant had never misbehaved with them. It was further incorrect to suggest that deceased, Sayara Bano never told them that her mother-in-law was demanding Rs.25,000/-. It was further incorrect to suggest that Sayara Bano never told her that her husband Rizwanuddin used to daily come to his house after consuming liquor and beat her and she was sick of her life. It was incorrect to suggest that Sayara Bano never told her that the appellant used to harass her and taunt her by saying that her father had given junk in the dowry. It was incorrect to suggest that the accused persons (before the trial court) were not responsible for the death of Sayara Bano. It was further incorrect to suggest that she was deposing falsely. It was also incorrect to suggest that no demand of Rs.25,000/- was made by Rizwanuddin or his mother. 15. PW-8, (father of the deceased-Intzar Ahmed) deposed in his examination-in-chief that deceased, Sayara Bano, was his daughter and was married to Rizwanuddin. As per PW-8, Rizwanuddin and his mother, Rehmat, started harassing and beating his daughter, Sayara Bano, after ¾ months of the marriage. On every Sunday, when his daughter, Sayara Bano visited his house, she complained that her husband used to daily consume liquor and beat her under the influence of liquor. His daughter also told him that the accused persons used to taunt her that they have been given junk (kabarh) in dowry. That Rs.25,000/- were demanded from Sayara and she was asked to bring the said amount from the parental house. PW-8 further deposed that Sayara Bano had taken Rs.25,000/- from his wife after 4/5 months of her marriage and had handed over the same to the accused persons (before the trial court). After 1/2 months, his daughter, Sayara Bano further told him that the accused persons were demanding one flat and a sum of Rs. 25,000/-. His daughter, Sayara Bano, also told him that the accused persons were threatening that their demands have to be fulfilled at any cost. PW-8 also deposed that his wife, Rauf Nisha and his bhabhi- Salma Begum, also went to the matrimonial house of the deceased. Both his wife and bhabhi tried to make the accused persons understand not to make such high demands and harass Sayara Bano, but they reiterated that their demands have to be fulfilled. Thereafter his wife and bhabhi were turned out from the house. This whole incident was narrated to him by his wife and bhabhi. Thereafter, he went to Bhavnagar, in connection with his work. On the night of 27/28.9.1998, he received a telephone call that his daughter, Sayara Bano, was seriously ill and he should come back to Delhi. On 28.9.1998, when he reached Delhi Airport at about 9:45 a.m., his relatives told him that his daughter had sustained burn injuries and had expired. Again said that his relatives informed him that his daughter had been burnt to death. His statement was recorded by the S.D.M. on 29.9.1998. His statement, Ex.PW-8/A, bears his signature and thumb impression at the place marked „A‟. PW-8 also identified the dead body of his daughter and the SDM had recorded his statement Ex.PW-8/B which bears his signature and thumb impression at point „A. 16. In the cross-examination by learned APP, PW-8 deposed that it was incorrect that he himself had handed over Rs.25,000/- to his daughter for handing over the same to the accused persons. Again said he had handed over Rs.25,000/- to his daughter for handing over the same to the accused persons and at that time