HISH ©Ot»TOP CHHATTISfeWH AT BILASPUR Coram: Hon'ble ttr.T.P.Sharma & Hon'bte Mr.ft.L.Jhanwar. JJ. Criminal Aopeo! No.111 of 200-3 Mwiio.r Kanwar Vwvus State "f Chhatt'sgarh JU&eMENT FOR CONSIDERATTQN Sd/- 1-K Sharma Judge Hon'b!e M.r.R.L..Jhcnwar;3- J2_ Sd/- R.L. Jhanwar Judge • IB's Post for Judg Sd/- J U D 6 E ^(f-1-2010 1 COURT OF CHHATTISe.ARH -4T BIL4.SPU!; ij A^pe1^! Nn. 111 cf Ho"'b!e .V.r.T.P.SHARMA Hon'bte Wr.R.L.JHANWAR. APPQ-.L.4NT M£i?i[jo,r Ko^wor1, son of Shri SCJGHSQJ (In Jci!) Kanwar, cqed about-25 vear's. rssidence on Jhcarama, P.S. Laiiunga, &istt.i<aigarh ^hhrttti^<3i3rkh^ Vsrsus RESPONDENT • State "f Chhattlsgarh through: Poiice Station - Laiiunqa, Tah. Sharcshodn. Ui5TT,K<2iyum ^L'fifiuTTISgCArfiJ fCRMINAL APPEAL UN&ER 5ECTION 374 f2) OF THE CODE OF CRIMIM.AL PftOCE&URE, 1973) Present:- Mr-Pushpendra Kuma'' Patel, counse! for" the appeHant. Mr.Raisndra TrjDa-riii.Panel iawver for The State/resoondenT. 5GMENT (Qeiivered on 28T" Jonuary, 2010) The Judgment of ths Court was de'.ivsred by T.P.Shcrms, J.;- 1. Choilsn^g in 't^Is QDD^st Is to ~hs lud'f3rn©ntof conviction ^. ordsr of sentence dated 27.12.2002 passed by the First Additional Ssssions J^'jdas, RniQcrh, in Ssssions TriQl No.136/2002, whsreby ^ wh^reundsr !eG"ned Fi?'st Add'ttonsl $sssions Judge Gftsr holding the <^pellCT'it guilty for cor'*n"ssion of hornicidal dec+h of Pushpa, convicted under' Section 302 of thes Zndis^i Pe.fioJ Code nnd s%r:tence'd hii?* to undsroo i?^Dr*i5oniTtSMt fop life o?id to QOV a fins of Rs.SOO/-- in dsfrtu!t of Drtvntent of fir's to furl't4^sr- ufid$re>o riaoroys imDrJsoy!)^e?nt for OH€ ?norlth 2- Jud^iT^ent is. impu9?led on ttis ^rou^d 'ti'io.t without tii£-r'€bslng ony c.1inch i?i<3 Gnd c^%dib!s- £yidef'c$, th$ Court bslo-w HQS convictsd rt?id cse~% i?i "' ''i ^ss^ \ <l!!»-'t' •"^!,^ sentenced 1+ie appeliar't QS Hlsnff'ii' •"^-f" •' / ' ond thsrs.bv coi^^lttsd / -^~* 5 • - . 3- CQS& of 'His; prosecutio^, 'n brtsf,i3 'H^at th^ oos^ll^^t w<ss h^vlno lllicit rslstion wit^ Pyshssi c^d Push&Q vyss Dr%nncnt. Viliaas *T^S€;ti»iQ wos conyened o"d on 29.4.2002 the appeliQnt accepted relation with Pushpo op.d took hsr wlth hf3T? in his houss a's his wife nfter syecutinn 'tf^s agreement Ex-P/2. 0" the fatefu! day cf 30.4.2002 at about 7.30 a.m., Pushpa was pi'ese"t In the house of the oppellsint ct Vi!kige J-harar", Sessions &lvision P-aigar'h. S-'bsequent'y, ft-'shpa was "<*t found in her bed (iFsd found In ths kitchen csGrdeH <s^d finolly shs clied. M^FQ WGS rscord^d vids Ex.P/1. F-I.R. WQS lodct^d bv fdthiBr of th^ dsc©<3t5'sd yid®Ex.P/11 "-3 "/ 1-"..-—* ~; ...—»»^ . ^<. ^ .,.—.»,«„-.,.,, 4fter sumt?tonsna ths whisssss £x*P/8. lnnu©stOVCT* dsGci body of ll^s deceased Pushpa was prepcped yide E.'<.°/9- &e<id body of 1+)e deceased WQS sent for cutoD<n? to Pr;mrtriv Hgoith €effYtyw_ LC"I!JHQQ. vlde Ex.P/6-A. Autopsy wfls conducted by &r'-ft.S.Upodhyoy pW-7) yide Ex-P/6 cnd fou^d th'at dscth w<ss dus to osDhvxjo1 os c r6su!t of o^ciano Drosoeirous Do'sof. A^"s©m€ntEx-P/2 wfss seized fron1 Mathylctl v'ids Ex-P/3. Viscsra of ths d'ec^o^d wss se-isscl vid^ £x..P/4. Znssct'ciid®bottl^ WQS seissd fyloimt ths ^DDstidytt vids Ex.P/^. J^ssct'eids • WQIS exoiTiin^d b1 Dr.P..5-Ut3sdhvsv (PW-7^ vlde Ex.P/T s^id found that cQuse of dsnth w<ss dr$ to or'QQ^o Drosserous Doisop cnd l^ie insscticid^ w<?3 o!so samf2. SnQt s^np WQS Drl^5<srsd by i!iyssttQ€Tti^^off^ceryids Ex.P/10. 4. Ststs^e^ts of ths wit^ssses were ^cordsd unde-r Ssctiori 161 of the Code of Cr*iminQ.I Procedure^ 19T3 (hsr'ci^after rsfe-rrsd to ss lths Cods'), After co^^lstlon of Inysstiio-tlon, chrt^eis shBct WQS filed 'n ths Court of Judicidl Mn€sistrct@ First Clcss, ^hQr^hoda, who in turn con<i?"lttsd the cn<€ to the- Court of' Ssssio^5 Jud^g, P^.iQcir'h front wh^rs It^e First Additiona'i Ssssions Judgs, Raigcrh receivad the ccse o" tnsnsfer for' +"iai. lt!!i, OrtiQinGllv chQr^s u^dsr Ssctio?! 306 of ^s Xndic-n Pef1^! Cods wctS frQm€d QQolnst the ^Dsllont. but durins ths tt"lG?. <xddstio?iQl cho.^os of S^ction 302 of the Ind'cn Peno! Code wes added vide order dated 11.10-2002. Xi ordsr1 to p?toys th^ guHt of ths accuscd/c^p^Hcnt^ 'ttie prosecut^ors hc-s e.xrfrnafl'£d css ?^c^y GS B wlt?i€3SSS- StQt^?TlSylt 0'f 'H^S rtCCUSsd/;3D|3€-ll<Xnt wos rtlso "e.cor'd^d undsr Ssction 313 of th$ Cod$ wh^^'s. hjps d®?')!i&dth^ circ'jmstGr.c 3 c"3DSQr!nci o.??.^xi?ist hi^ <^d cloim^d !ri"oc%rcfs cnd fQlss i|ic-rttlon l^ 'Hfis c'i<i?^$ tr< <3U83~io^. The QDssJlcint hos toksn defsfice 'tiiQt he waS not hcying ony re!at'or> wrti the deceased- Even Pushpo. was Drw-ssnt ot the t^ne of hls ?Tl's^ri€IQ3. P®rte?"!tsof PushDQ heivB forcefullv ssFit he.^ to hi^ house. th£r€-'for'£,sh8 WQS on^ovsd Qysd co??l?3iittsd suicid^. The appe'icnt has exaniined defence wlt"ess Ba'dey who has deposed that st ths. titn®o'f Incids-nt h@ v^as Drsss^t yi€<xr Dorld wher% Pysrlbo-' w<!(s clso DrsssMt. who told thst so^-sbody Is shoutinQ. tl^ep. h^ clorin with Pvsribo.l w^?it tov»?'cr'ds KolGbcdl ^jhsrs PushDci wcis IvifQ. she h<is orr.itted shs WGS unco^scious ssnd 'sT^—^risou^d V^GS cc'sril^. Shs WQS not l'n G oosition to tn!k. Then Pvoiribsi wsnt to th$ houss of ^olh'er ond fQ'Hisr of ^1».—. > .-, . . w . f3.,> - , 1«^.^ ,. ^--n. .^. , ^.-,... . < . » ..>.«...»—»—, »„ .a.-...^^-^ ^...~ ,-—.-,^,-; PushDCs. Me w<ss Qrg^.nt for ons c'1ftd hct!'f hours. But in his c?*oss-£-'<ri^-3n3ttion h% hcs sdtTnittscl tho.t nfKslfi ond feTtCtls ils<sd to no tft €GS€.\Ti ssDQ.rQts. dlrectior'. The. DJCSOS. for b:?xthlnci for w<2.!<p cnd fs?TtGls QFS. se.oarots •a'td thsre'wos no occasioin to T^e^t ?niai€ ctyid fe^Ql^ n,t Dond. Hs hos sD^cificslIy adinitt^d th<st ssftsr $o3&, hs d*rectty co^^ to hts house. ^sfsncs witnsss Ti!<xsobci hcts dssossd ;n his evlds^cs th<xt ^!®^PyshpQ wo.s ssnt to ths hous^ o'^ the GQrl€.!lsrit. sh% wos Drsssnt iin her houss' cnd hcrss-if HQS ?iot tnik€-dwith Gccr^d r'ela.tinQ to PushDQ. Aftsr- affo?'di^<s <sn ooporhjnity of hscrl?i<? to th$ pQr*t|g-s the Fir'st .Additioy'c..l Sess'o^s Jud^e, Rolo;Esrth hsfs coyvicted Q!?1d seyits^ced ths c^Dsllsnt <xs cs.for'smsnt'o^ed. Ws have hertrd Mr- Pushosnd^ l&??larl P?stsl. coursssl for 'Hf!ls ODDeHo^t and AAr*Rcr,|endr<x Trloathi; Panel lawyer for the Ststs Qnd pefu^d 11'is i?nSLSGned lijdo^s^t and rscord o'f the Cou?'t b^toy". f~y'-'— ^--"y 9- Lsomsd cour'sd fop 'll^s QDDello^t vKhs^^ntlv cxrousd ttiQt o'rlolyQliv ths ^, ~, ^——— ,<.—..—.^...^,.,.^. irosscutiop hcs collsctsd ths svldencg f^latir'o to co^fflissio?! of su'cide by Pushps/ but on ths bcsis of syld€nc®of Sukhr5m 0^W-2) Qr!d Sukhwori Bsi @ Bhukhli (PW~3). fother <s?id mother o'f dscsossd Pi'shD^. chor'Q^ WQS cltsrsd ond charos of Ssctiop. 302 of ths Indi<x?i Psno'1 Codc w<is nddsd- Lssmsd couns^l furths?' eirQusd thQt opicinG!lv thssg; w-tnssses hQy® not stctBd Q'^vthlnQ r'slQtino. to t7tyrd^r irl 't^c'.!?* st^t'swe.^ts recorded under Section 161 of the Code, byt thay haye exaggsrated th^ir stcit€?Tis?itsir; th's Court whlch ^r^ not rsllobis cy^d convictio?n wo'jlet not be s^fs onlv o?i t^s bcsis of stQt$(^s?1ts not siiDDortsd by o'H'i^r ^yirf^nc-e. 10. On the other" ha"d, learned State counse! supported the impugned Judgment cmd argaed that tke evidersc^ of Sukhnim p>W-2) wd Su|<hwari Boi @ Bhykhli FPW-3Y 'fc.ths?* and ^nothe?* of dscsose-d PushD" ipsDir*®s coiifid©tic£,tr'jstworthy snd saf@ to rsly s'yhr>rn Pu^ipc hcs ?nctds dyii^^ dsc!?3?'ation that the QtDn€'llGrlthas fo^cefullv Doursd Doison l?i his r^outh- 11. In ords^ to a&oreciate the arQU?!lsrits odyoncBd oy1 behGif of the D<xrti^s. we, haves sxnminsd ths- evidencs adduced on behalf of th% pGrti^3, Xn tt11^ sore-sent csss. o.bnori^d/unn<s'hj?'C[l ds'oth QS G r'ssult of noison)Mfs of ths deceasad has r'ot beef. substcntialiy disputed by the esppellant, o" 'riie othsr ho?"d. otherwss clso ^stcblishsd bv the- ^vlds^c^ of Dr-R.S-Up<sdhyay (PW-^) ftnd autopsy ?wpor°t E>;.P/7 which r'eyeQis 'H^Gt c<xsf£ of d^ath wcs pcjiso?ii?ig as use of or^ono phosphorus. Pung€?Ti'3!?lsli of 'nsecticid®w&s dso Dr^S£?itm the o.bdcme»i<?f 'H'^s deceossd. 12. -As reQards the co^Dlicit^ of the <iccu^d/c>DDsS!o^t i!n the cr'i^e i^ ^uestion, Sukhrcm (PW~2^ father of th!s dec^c^^d^ h<xs d^pos^d in his svidsrscs thct decscssd PushDQ vt?cs hfxvln<3 illlcit r<s!Qtio?i with 'ri^s rtccussd snd WGS p8fle§nQilit th^ou^h the accussd. Thsy conys^^d nl€stirl3 wh^3^ th@ 'QDDeIla^t c.ccsDtsd rslation nHd cnrssd to kssD PushQci <xs his wifc. P$i''SQH3 of ths D0;^chov£tthnv€honded ovsr PushDC!' to 1^s oo^sllcrst. ^ !!1 1 THssc'bQl f&W~2Y slster-ln-low of th©'QDDslifx'^t wss cxlso Dr^ssnt who told Pushsrt thctT you should n.ot 't'c'ke! r^so! bsciuse 'thsv will Drovids Doisor! o-nd on 3^cond dely P*iJshD& we.i'it to tQks fstch wQtj£!n to the- we.li o'f Nothuls1' whsrs hg.?> ?no1^i@r w^s sittisiQ who!?^ Tii^sobc'i told ItiQt thcy will Dltovid& Doison, thsn his wifs; told ths so^e to Ktj!rtlpcs^ etind l&!niro^n told 'ttist thsy wHI a^Gin conysnis Tt€'st'M^ on to^orroy" ?inorr*ip/i. S@co?id do.y <it about 5 a-n". Pyar-obci wo.s shoutir'.g that what happened to Pushpa Bai, ths^i h& ws^.t 'tf^$-i'ls PushDn wo.s IvlnQ itn kitchsn QQrden csnd hffr b%d bcskst QS'id clothss yy^rs nrisssflt th^sn^. Hs Qsksd h's dGudht^r PyshDn the-n shs told thct cccusgd s:t over her chsst ond has forcefullv Do!-i?*s< s^i^ ^c!fne i?i h^r rnouth . Sukhwori BG" •slso reachBd thsr®.thsn they informed the yiHagers. After" sornetime Pushpo d'ed. Sukhwnri Bci © ihukh!; (PW-3), mo+her of the deceassd, has also corroborated the svidencs of SijkhroiT1 fPW"2^ Defeyic^ hois cross-sxf2?nitfssd SukhrtQ??t fPW-2'l ifi dstoiL Zn ibsfo. 7 of his crolss-sx<sminntioy1 hs he^s ^d^'tted that Pushpo. WQS ^arr'ied two y€^2?'s prior to the inc^de?lt wi'tts SaiTto[yl®i,but WQS *iot re-sidin^ with hsr- husbcnd. X?t Dr1!r'fl 9 o'f his cro5c-l©xcin^i^Qtion,he has dsfiied llict thsy have for'csfuliy s%rit PushDQ to the houss of ths anDsllcnt. Zn DCfa 11, he has (xdmlttsd "Hi<it h$ cQyp.s to kno^ the fact that Pushn<i stcivsd \n vsrnsidrth of ths <sDn€!lQa^t with "iecs of the cusD^licnt whslg ti'is Gccus&d WQS slespinQ irislds th^ ^ooiTi with his wife- Xn peirci 13, he hcls adtT'ittsd tho.t hs hos lcdgsd ths r'spor't, but at ths tiwe of lod^in^ ths repoft, he ^?ss ufider shocked Qnd 'H^e^efore^ he- hos iiiot info?''m®d ths solics that the rtb?3slJQ31it ho.s <idlTlInistsrffd Doison. tt1ouQh he hQS infor?¥iied Kotwar be'fo^'s !odQinQ r^sort 'tfiGt l^s eiccuseid hQS cciyssd to drir'k no'sora to hsr dctUQht®?*. 13. Defence has cross-excmined Sukhwari (PW-3) in detail. In para 6 of her cross-e?<Q?Tiiy1ieition. sh®hcs adn'ittsd thQt hsr d€tu<3hter' hcis oss^ed ths niQht in ve^Gnd^ with ?ii€c$ of thg aDDsllffl^t <ind 'Hie QS)DsllG"t h<rs Dcisssd his inl^ht i^sida tt^s rooi^ with his ??lsr?*isd wifs- She hss dso denisd thdt ^hs ho^ not stated sart .A to -A i" h^r* s+Qt$mey>t recorded m8ii si aa .. i3i.:B?% '-i,Rg:-<: isndsr Section 161 of ttss Ccds which rsysais that *^°^ TR "s^^^^n f^?^ sbgd ^q Ts "" 14- StQt®^entsof tiiese witrlssses wsr% record^d on 9.5.2002 after 10 dovs of ths i!ftc'd<e?it bv 'ti^g Do!ic®vlds Exs.D/1 ^ ?^/1 in which thss^ W!tn®sse< s • f hnvs SG'scificciIlY stQtsd thnt PushD% hc?5 Qasssd hsr' niffht outs'de ths FOOIT' d?1>d she hns co^^^tted sulcid^. but 1?1 th^'r evidsyice! bBfore the Court on 8.10.2002 ofter' 3 mon+hs of the incider't •t+iey can'e with new story- Pollcs hos not sxci??ilnsd 'ti'i'^ss witnssses o'fi ths- d£ltp o^ 'H^s incld^^t i-g. 30.4.2002 cind ho.s rscorded th@ stst^misnts of thes® witnssscs on 9.5-2002, oft^r 10 dsys of li^e *"cid€nt, 'n which th^y hrtyB not ststgd tho.t the. o&DsHcnt has cnusgd to drink Doison to the dscs<33£d inter <?Jict. thev h'o'vs sDffci'ficdlv stcifed thct hA!i* d<xuQht^^ has co!nmitt<sd sulcids bv co?isu?nilnQ Doison clrd shs; <?t£n/^d outsid'®th$ rooin whit^ ths ^ ^^.. .-^»i..,.<-J ^,-—.-^..— .^. —,.-»-^ . ^^ c©DsHnrlt.wrt3 s!$sDl?irt Insid®th@ roo^1 clo^Q wth his ?nclrr>ii£dwife- 19. SukhrQ?n (PW-^ he.s dsDo^d iri &criQ 13 of hls cross-sxQrn'riQtion thctt hs has ttl'"eady informed to cho'A'kidar before 'odging "f ths repor't that the QongjlQitt nns ccussd to drink Doiso'r^. but hs hQS 'not sstated the Dolice eyen aft^r 10 dovs of ths incidsnt- Thsss cre ths o!'lly subst<1t?itiol ^vidsncs ^elstlnQ tn cot^^sssio^ oif honficidc'1! deQth owountiinrt to ?nu?*dflr' of ths d^ceassd. They h^ve not stctsd to 't^e poiic^s that o?1 9-5<2002, cfter 10 doys of the incident rslc+ing to such act of the (ypeilfflit, but thigv hav<E stQted to ths DoHc®that the dscs<1sed has co!iTt»?i'tted suicids ^. ...-..-^ «..„.—» .—,..— jp- / by co"<ut?tin3 poisoy, This fGCt is seif-coRtr'adictor^. Tt^e <ifope5Q.id pQ-rt of ths svids^c^ does "ot Inspire confidspce, tpustworthy oir)d safe to reiy for the convic+io" of tha asDallcnt that too for heinous offence wi1t>out any further corroborction- Aijtopsy wcis conduc+ed by &r'.ft.S.Upadhyay ^V|/-7)^ in yyh'ch "0 OTly extr>rlnQti 'njury wos found by 'ttiic doctor of stru93^e or any "nJNry oyer the chest- Ex-P/2 'ti^e a!le^d Qgr^eement reysa's tha't It'e c!IDD€!lQnt hss aQreed to keso the deceased Qts his wife. Sukhnam yW~2) has specific<i!!y deposed m por'n 4 of his evidence 't+'nt th.iS dsc^QSsd w<ss found nefGr wsll n!oriQ with bs.d. b^skst ond clo'tt^es. Ths ^y'dsncs of Sukhr^is?* (PW-^ SukhwQri (PW-3) rev^sls 'tiict 1^is nnDsilQnt hc'3 ^ot ^llo^cd ths dscsas^d to sl@PD with hiffi <snd shs Dosssd hsr njrtht yyifh nigCS O'f 'Ht® QDD®!!Q"t in yer?2"dcth- Ths Drosecut'o^ wn3 uncler' obligcitio?! to proye 'ts case beyo^d QJI shsdow of doubt- TTie svid€"c$ Sukhram (PW-2) SjRhwari (PW-3) reiating to oiuse to dyink the poison to the deceased by the cppeliont is not reiiable. The deeeo-sed wns lodv cnd shs d'ed o" s^co^d dsv ^?f th®Qll^<3^c3 Drtrlchctvrtt cis o. result of consuwing poison- The evidence collected o" behclf of the orosecution wvea.is that the deceased her'self hcs consuwed Doison. The sppellant has taken defenc^ that the parents of the dececised haye forc«fu!!ysent the dececsed to his house without her 'A'ill and consent, *rif>^rsfo?*^. she hos co"su!w[sc! DO'SO?^. 16- This is a" appec! against ttie judgment, in which the appeHcint hos been coriylcted under ^ectio" 302 of tiie Zln!diotn Psncs! Code Qnd ssntep.csd to u"cierQo iiTiDr'iso!niTtsnt for !if^. Ths c'so^iioj^t WQS QJSO chGr^ed fo'r' coIT^?nissio?' of o'ffsnce of Qbcttemsnt of suic'd^ ou?ilsh*sbls undsr' Sffct*on 306 of the Tndian Pena! Code, but 'm this cose, the prosecutio" has not adducsd ony evictence to show tho.t ths csppgHc^t has s'ded^ 'nstigo.ted or /xbo.tsd th^ offencs of suicids, thersfor's, €Vftn co"v'ctiori of the aDDeHont for the con'.m.ission of abats">e"t of suicide wou!d not a!so be Dossib's. 17. After apprecia+ing the ey'dencs availoble o" record, lear"ed First Additional Sessions -Judge has placed r'etiance i" the eyjdence of Sukhram (PW-2) aid Sukhwarl (PW-3) while conyicting the appellont under Section 302 of the India" Penal Code- 18. Ttie evideice of Sukhra"" (PW-2) dnd Sukhwari (PW-3) is not re!iab!e to -Hf)e extsnt th<st lfle; €g)D€!!Qnthos caused to drink the Doiso" <tnd >H ths abse"ce of onv such evidence thet the aDDe!!cnt hos caused to drink tiis "o'son to ths deceas£dor o.dministered Dotson or co!nD£i!@d her to drink the Doison. conyictioh under Ssction 302 of the Indian Penal Code would not be !egc!!y susta'nable, but the Court be'ow has not considered this most H^citeriQl ciSD^ct of th^ cclse on.d thsi^by coiTt^fiitt<e^i illgQoJity. 19- For ths forsQO'no re<iso?'s. ws o-rs of ths co'nsid^red yisyy ihot co^vict'o^ <S se^tenc^ irnoosed UDOI ths '^DBliont fir®inot sustQirtQble ur1dsr the IQ1^. Conseouently, the appea! is a'lowed. Co"yiction & sentence imposed upon 'Hf?e appslicint undsr 5%ct*on 302 of ths Xndic^ PeiQl Cods Gr^ h^reby set <2Sids. TT^e <xoDsllont 's i" custodv. H€ bs s^t cit tiber>'h/ cEt once; a^d bs rsleo.'ss.d 'forthwith- 'f not i'tsc3uirls>d in rt?iv othsr CQS€. ^ __'Sfc._^ ___ Sd/- T.P. Siiarma Judge Sd/- R.L. Jhanwar Judge a'-