Anita @ Guria vs State

A.N. Jindal, J.—The case pertains to the injuries suffered by the old lady at the hands of a maid servant i.e. accused-appellant Anita @ Guria (herein referred as ''the accused'') during the night of 12.10.2000, on account of which she was prosecuted and vide judgment dated 26.11.2002, she was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years u/s 308 IPC; rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs. 500/- u/s 452 IPC.

The injured Kuljit Kaur was living on the ground floor of House No. 3076, Sector 19-D, Chandigarh. The accused had remained employed as maid servant with her for 4-5 days prior to the occurrence. The complainant Ashok Kumar (herein referred as ''the complainant'') was residing on the top floor of the said house. On 12.10.2000, at about 10.15 p.m. on hearing cries, the complainant came down and found that the iron gate was closed from inside and some shrieks were coming from there. The complainant entered the court yard from back side of the house and peeped into the house through the window and found Kuljit Kaur lying on the ground floor with injuries on her face. In the meanwhile, Narinder Kaur (PW3) daughter of Kuljit Kaur also arrived there. Then the door was opened. On asking, Kuljit Kaur informed that the accused had caused her injuries with the roller (belna) and had threatened to kill her. Thereafter, he and the other witnesses noticed that the accused had concealed herself beneath the bed, from where she was pulled out. The injured was sent to the Government Medical College & Hospital, Sector 32, Chandigarh.

After recording the aforesaid statement, ASI Karnail Singh made his endorsement and sent the same to the Police Station Sector 19, Chandigarh, on the basis of which FIR was registered against the accused. ASI Karnail Singh prepared the rough site plan; took into possession the roller, lifted blood stains spread over the floor at the place of occurrence and took the same into possession vide separate recovery memos. He also took into possession double bed sheet and the pillow stained with blood. The accused was arrested and he also got photographed the place of occurrence, recorded statements of the witnesses. After receiving fitness certificate from the doctor, he also took into possession salwar (trouser) and kameez (shirt) of the injured vide separate recovery memos. He also took into possession the blood sample of the injured Kuljit Kaur during the course of investigation and on completion of the investigation challan was presented in the court which committed to the court of Session.

On finding a prima facie case, the accused was charged under Sections 308/452/506 IPC to which she pleaded not guilty and opted to contest.

In order to substantiate the charges, the prosecution examined Ashok Kumar (PW1), Kuljit Kaur (PW2), Narinder Kaur (PW3), C. Raj Pal (PW4), C. Dewan Singh (PW5), SI Tarsem Lal (PW6), C. Yash Pal (PW7), Dr. Sanjeev Senior Scientific Officer CFSL, Chandigarh (PW8), HC Ramesh Kumar (PW9), ASI Karnail Singh (PW10), Dr. Navin Manchanda, Sr. Resident, GMCH, Sector 32, Chandigarh (PW11) and Kalawati, Jr. Assistant, GMCH, Sector 32, Chandigarh.

When examined u/s 313 Cr.P.C. the accused denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing against her and pleaded her false implication in the case. She further explained that she is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. However, no evidence was led in defence.

The trial ended in conviction.

Arguments heard. Record perused.

Ashok Kumar complainant (PW1) is the tenant of the injured Kuljit Kaur, at house No. 3076, Sector 19-D, Chandigarh. He would be the last person to depose against his land lady as it has normally been seen that the relations between the landlord and tenant are never cordial, but he appears to be truthful witness. He having heard the cries came down on the ground floor so as his wife while smelling that some landlady was crying. Thereafter she phoned her daughter who also reached the spot. The accused after causing injuries had concealed herself beneath the bed and she was pulled out from there. By that time, police had also arrived there. Kuljit Kaur was taken to the hospital. Medico Legal Report also reveals that she was admitted in the hospital on the same day and her statement was recorded on the next day and the FIR was recorded promptly on the statement of the complainant, an eye witness of the occurrence, on the same day. ASI Karnail Singh is the witness to the recovery of roller (Belna) from the place of occurrence. He further states that on pointing out by the complainant, he had taken the accused from beneath the bed and arrested her. He also got photographed the place of occurrence. There is no delay in lodging the FIR, arrest of the accused and the recovery of the weapon of offence, so also in getting examined the injured.

No force could be found in the argument that it was night time occurrence and is based on the testimonies of interested witnesses. In this regard, it is noticed that Kuljit Kaur injured, a stamped witness, having suffered injuries at the hands of the accused has given minute details of the occurrence while stating that the accused came to her house when she was snoring and she sat on her breast and caused injuries to her with the roller, thereafter, on hearing cries she concealed herself beneath the bed from where she was taken out. These facts stand corroborated by Ashok Kumar (PW1), Narinder Kaur (PW3) and SI Karnail Singh (PW10). Ashok Kumar being the tenant in the house cannot be termed as interested witness. As regards the argument that no proper identification parade was conducted, it is noticed that the accused Anita who is also called as Guria was arrested from the spot. Ashok Kumar and Kuljit Kaur being the inmates of the house, where the accused was working had no difficulty to identify her, therefore, in such circumstances, test identification parade was not essential.

As regards the injuries, only one injured and one accused and the weapon of offence is the one which has also been described. The injuries so suffered by the accused are also consistent with the ocular version. In any case, there is no reason to disbelieve Kuljit Kaur injured and no reason has been assigned by the accused for implicating her in place of the real culprit. Similarly, Narinder Kaur who was a regular visitor to her mother has also corroborated the occurrence. She had seen the accused while concealing herself beneath the bed. She happened to be there as she was called by the wife of Ashok Kumar tenant. Further corroborative evidence is the statement of Dr. Sanjeev (PW8), report Ex.P19 reveals that the bed sheet, salwar, kameez, as taken into possession which were sent to the C.F.S.L. Chandigarh were found stained with human blood, on comparison of the blood group, it was found to be of the same blood group as that of the injured.

Now coming to the offence u/s 308 IPC, Kalawati (PW12) has stated that medico-legal report Ex.P38 was prepared by Dr. Hartej Singh and it bears his signatures. Dr. Hartej Singh could not be examined as his whereabouts are not known. To prove the MLR is hardly sufficient to prove the nature of injuries, therefore, in the absence of the doctor who had examined the injured and opined about the nature of the injuries, the same cannot be treated as dangerous to life as doctor was not available to the accused for cross examination and verify his reliability and credibility. Unless the doctor is tested on the envil of cross examination and necessary statics is not brought on record to know as to how these injuries were dangerous to life, the court could not convict the accused u/s 308 IPC. The fact remains that the medico legal report Ex.P38 and the opinion Ex.P40 prove that the injured had suffered injuries which could not be treated beyond "simple in nature". At the same time while scrutinizing the testimonies of the witnesses, this Court also confirms the findings returned by the trial court that as the accused trespassed into the house of the landlady with an intention to cause her injuries, therefore, the offence u/s 452 IPC is also made out against the accused.

Now coming to quantum of sentence, the accused appears to be a dare devil in committing this act while entering into the house of Kuljit Kaur when she was all alone during night time and injuring her. However, keeping in view the injuries found on her person to be simple in nature, she is convicted u/s 323 IPC as such sentence could be reduced to one year for both the offences i.e. u/s 452/323 IPC without alteration in the sentence of fine.

Resultantly, this appeal is partly accepted, the accused is acquitted of the charges u/s 308 IPC and sentence awarded to her is reduced to one year each for the offence under Sections 323/452 IPC. However, the sentence of fine, already awarded, would be treated as fine u/s 323/452 IPC.