Deva vs State of Haryana

G.C. Mital, J.

Deva has been sentenced to imprisonment for life for murdering his wife Kitabo. The conviction and sentence have been passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jind, vide his judgment dated 181987. This appeal has been directed against the said judgment.

Briefly, the prosecution story is that after the death of Anguri Devi, first cousin of Kitabo and first wife of Deva accused, Deva had married Kitabo. The relations between Deva and Kitabo were strained and she was made to live with her parents. Kitabo had made an application on 11989 to the Police against Deva, her husband, stating that her husband had levelled baseless allegations against her moral character and had also threatened to kill her like her cousin Anguri Devi, the first wife of Deva accused. During investigation, a compromise was allegedly arrived at.

The mother of Deva died on 30121986 and since Kitabo happened to be at her inlaws place, she complained to her brothers and sisterinlaw for the illtreatment meted out to her by Deva, and requested them to take her away to her parents house. It was promised that Jai Bhagwan, her brother, would come on Sankrant day to take her to her parents house.

On 12.11987 Jai Bhagwan reached village Karsindhu and enquired about Deva and Kitabo when he was told that both had gone for making bricks. After some time Mewa, elder brother of Deva, came and on enquiry he was told that they had gone to fetch barseem in the field. Then Mewa and Jai Bhagwan went for stroll and saw that when Kitabo was cutting barseem, Deva accused gave blows to her with Kassi. Jai Bhagwan rushed to rescue her but she fell down on receipt of the blows and the accused ran away with the Kassi in hand. This incident, according to the prosecution, took place at about 5.15 PM.

Kitabo was then taken to the Hospital Uchana, by Mewa brother of the accused and Jai Bhagwan, her brother in a car of Zile Singh PW6. There, the Medical Officer found Kitabo dead and sent ruqqa Exhibit PE at 9.30 PM to the SHO, Police Station, Uchana, on receipt of which Inder Singh, Sub Inspector reached the hospital and recorded statement of Jai Bhagwan at 10.30 PM, and then forwarded the same to the Police Station, which formed the basis of formal FIR, Exhibit PF/1. The FIR was recorded in the police station at 10.40 PM and it reached the IIlaqa Magistrate on 1311987 at 5.00 AM.

The Sub Inspector then recovered some blood lying near the dead body, got the postmortem examination of the dead body conducted and also recorded the statement of Mewa, brother of the accused besides recording the statement of Mai Dia chowkidar of village Karsindhu. Inder Singh, Sub Inspector, then visited the spot in the village for investigation which was not possible because of darkness and then on 1311987 he again inspected the spot, recovered one sickle and also recovered blood stained earth. He also took into possession one Palli.

The autopsy on the dead body of the deceased was conducted by Dr. Balram PW1, on 1311987 at 12.45 AM, who found rigor mortis in all the four limbs. The doctor found two incised wounds and one transversely placed incisedwound over the parietal region 3" X I" X bone deep underlying bone fractured gaping and clotted blood present, placed transversely In the opinion of the doctor, the time between the injury and death and postmortem was within 24 hours. The cause of death was opined due to multiple injuries on the head with compound fractures, which were antemortem in nature and were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature.

The prosecution, at the trial, examined Jai Bhagwan PW2, the first informant and one of the eyewitnesses, besides producing Dhani Ram PW3, cousin of the deceased, Mange Ram Sarpanch PW5 and Smt. Shanti PW 10. Zile Singh, whose car was hired to take Kitabo to the hospital was examined as PW6 but this witness did not support the prosecution story. Mewa, who as per the prosecution story, remained in long association with Jai Bhagwan, the first informant, during the process of investigation, has not been produced by the prosecution. Even according to Jai Bhagwan, brother of the deceased, Mewa had remained in his company when the deceased was allegedly brought from the fields to the house and also when she was taken to the hospital in the car of Zile Singh. Sub Inspector Inder Singh, who investigated the case appeared as PW 11 and gave details of the investigation conducted by him. Dr. Balram PW1 gave the details of the medical evidence which also consisted of the postmortem report.

When examined under Section 313, Code of Criminal Procedure, the accused in his first statement as well as in the supplementary statement denied the prosecution allegation and branded the case to be false one. He produced two witnesses in defence to plead that he was in no way involved in this murder and that Kitabo deceased was brought on a cot from the fields and that from the house of Deva, she was taken to the hospital.

After considering the evidence of the prosecution, the learned Sessions Judge, Jind, convicted and sentenced the accused as has been indicated in the opening part of the judgment.

10 First of all, motive of commission of the offence is not clear in the case. No doubt that there were some strained relations between the accused and Kitabo deceased, as it has been sought to be established by the prosecution, by pleading about the application on which a compromise is alleged to have been arrived at before Mange Ram Sarpanch. But after that compromise, no evidence has been brought on record to show that relations between the appellant and the deceased were still strained. More so, as per the evidence, of Jai Bhagwan, the sole alleged eyewitness to the occurrence, on his arrival in the village, he was firstly told that both the accused as well as the deceased had gone to make bricks and then he was told by Mewa, brother of the accused that after making bricks they had gone to fields to fetch Barseem. As noticed earlier, Mewa, has not been produced to corroborate the statement of Jai Bhagwan.

Another significant fact is that Zile Singh, whose car was allegedly hired for taking the deceased to the hospital, and who himself was driving the car, has not supported the prosecution story.

It is pertinent to note that Udey Shankar, Sub Inspector, PW4 has deposed about the application having been made by Kitabo and, subsequent compromise between the parties. Strange enough, that application allegedly made to the police by Kitabo was not traceable as per the evidence of this witness. This circumstance also creates a doubt about the motive part of the prosecution story.

Jai Bhagwan, PW2, who is the first informant and the eyewitness to the occurrence has not been corroborated by the prosecution witnesses. His own statement goes to show that firstly he was told. that Deva and Kitabo (deceased) had gone to make bricks and thereafter they had gone to fetch Barseem. This shows that they had cordial relations and were living happily. Further, as per the defence witnesses, Phula son of Khakhi, Mange, Mewa, Suba and Mai Dia were the persons who had taken the deceased to the hospital. Jai Bhagwan, when appeared as PW2, has also admitted the presence of Mewa, brother of the accused with him and has further stated that the car in which the deceased was taken to the hospital, was brought by Mewa and that Mewa had also accompanied him to the hospital. These circumstances clearly go to show that accused had nothing to do with the murder of the deceased.

It would not be without significance to have another note worthy feature of this case, that is, the investigation of the case has revolved around the same set of persons who were together at all the stages. Dhani Ram, is the witness who deposed about the motive part and about the previous application and this witness has also been shown as having been present when the disclosure statement was made by the accused to the police as well as the recovery which was effected subsequent to the disclosure statement.

Mange Ram Sarpanch, PW5, who is cited as a witness to the previous application story, by which a compromise was allegedly arrived at between the husband and wife had to admit that the compromise was also undated. Neither the compromise has any date nor the application which was allegedly made by Kitabo deceased to the police was traceable.

It has come in the statement of Jai Bhagwan that he picked up his sister from the Barseem fields and then brought her home with the help of Mewa and both of them put her in the car. Had it been so, he and Mewa would have received blood stains on their bodies and clothes. Admittedly, the police did not take his blood stained clothes into possession, more particularly, when according to the prosecution story, his statement was recorded at the very first instance by the police in the hospital itself. Otherwise also, his evidence is inconsistent with the medical evidence. Furtherly, the details or injuries furnished by Jai Bhagwan, alleged. having been given by the accused to the deceased, are inconsistent with the medical evidence. From this it appears that Jai Bhagwan had not witnessed the occurrence. Under these circumstances, we do not think it safe to rely on such uncorroborated evidence.

Another noteworthy feature of the case is that there has been an unexplained inordinate delay in lodging the first information report. From the circumstances it appears that Jai Bhagwan might have been associated from his village Karkhana and was introduced as an eyewitness as well as the first informant. There is contradiction between the medical evidence as well as the investigating agency as to at what time the first information report was registered.

From the above circumstances, it is clear that the evidence brought on record by the prosecution is not sufficient to sustain the conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Sessions Judge, Jind.

For the reasons recorded above, we are of the view that the prosecution has not been able to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt and the prosecution story is full of suspicions. Giving the benefit of doubt, the accused is acquitted. He is in custody and is ordered to be released forthwith.