AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Admit.
With the consent of the parties, the case is taken up forhearing for final disposal.
Appellant has preferred this appeal aggrieved by judgment and order dated 13.03.2018 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Sawai Madhopur in
Sessions Case No.45/2014 (59/2014), whereby trial Court has convicted the appellant for offence under Section 306 IPC and has sentenced him to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and has also imposed fine of Rs.2,000/-, on non payment of fine to further undergo one month simple
imprisonment.
In brief, the facts of the case are that on 16.08.2013, deceased committed suicide, an inquest report was lodged on the same day with regard to
suicide. After eight days i.e. on 24.08.2013, complaint Ex.P-2 was lodged which was sent to the police for registration of F.I.R. Consequently, F.I.R.
Ex.P-14, was registered. After due investigation police submitted charge-sheet under Section 306 IPC against the appellant. Court after hearing the
charge-arguments, charged the appellant for offence under Section 306 IPC. Appellant denied the charges and sought trial.
As many as fifteen witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution and fourteen documents were exhibited. Appellant was examined under
Section 313 Cr.P.C. After hearing the final arguments, appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 306 IPC and sentenced as herein
above mentioned, aggrieved by which the present appeal has been preferred.
It is contended by counsel for the appellant that the prosecution has utterly failed to bring home the crime against the appellant. Postmortem report
was not exhibited to prove the factum of demise of the deceased. No record was produced to establish that the messages as mentioned in transcript
Ex.P-9 were sent from the mobile of the appellant. It is also contended that Court below has not considered the statement of independent witness
PW-7 Hamidan Bano who in her cross-examination had admitted that the deceased was having dispute with her mother and brothers as they were
showing her boys against her wish. She has mentioned that this dispute was going on for a pretty long time.
It is also contended that there is no suicide note to connect the appellant with the crime. It is not established that the deceased committed suicide
because appellant talked to some other girl. It is argued that baseless allegation has been levelled which are not supported by any documentary
evidence or other proof to establish the crime.
It is further contended that there is no allegation levelled against the appellant in the inquest report and complaint has been lodged after an inordinate
delay of eight days.
It is also contended that from the statement of PW-6-Vimla Kanwar, mother of the deceased, it is evident that the deceased refused to marry the
boys who were shown to her as she wanted to marry the boy of her choice. It is argued that mother has also deposed that brothers of deceased were
objecting to her marrying in a different community.
Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the appeal.
I have considered the contentions.
From the evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution, it is clear that appellant was having relations with the deceased, however the fact that
some dispute took place between the deceased and the appellant is not established as the prosecution has utterly failed to prove that the transcript
Ex.P-9 and the messages mentioned therein were sent by the appellant to the deceased from his mobile.
Prosecution has further failed to prove the factum of death as the postmortem report is not exhibited and appellant had no opportunity to examine
the doctor with regard to cause of death of the deceased.
Yet another piece of evidence which the Court below has utterly failed to take note of is statement of PW-7-Hamidan Bano who has in clear term
deposed that the deceased was having dispute with her mother and brothers as she was not willing to marry the boy of choice of her family members.
She has also mentioned that the dispute was continuing for a pretty long time. The fact that brothers of deceased were not willing to marry her in
another community is also admitted by PW-6-Vimla Kanwar, mother of the deceased.
PW-5- Bhagat Singh, brother of the deceased who was present at the time when her sister committed suicide has mentioned that before police
came on the spot, he had lowered his sister and had opened the knot. He has also mentioned that at around 3:00 pm on the same day, a friend of the
deceased named Pooja came to meet her, prosecution has even not cared to interrogate Pooja with regard to her visit to the house of deceased and
what was communicated to her by the deceased soon before her death. PW-5 has denied portion A to B of Ex.D-2 in the statement recorded under
Section 161 Cr.P.C. In the portion A to B of Ex.D-2, PW-5 Bhagat Singh has stated that after opening the knot, he alongwith Deepak carried Kiran to
the chawk where he checked Kiran and Kiran was breathing. In Court statement he has denied giving such statement. Police has even not cared to
interrogate Deepak or make him a witness when he was present at the place of incident.
Investigation done in this case is under serious shadow of doubt and the case might have been a case of honour killing, as brothers and mother of
the deceased did not want to marry the deceased in another community and the deceased was not willing to marry any boy of her community.
The delay in lodging of the complaint is also not explained by the family members of the deceased. PW-4 Kanta who is sister of deceased in her
examination in chief has stated that deceased was in love with appellant. She has also mentioned that deceased used to tell everything to Hamidan
Bano who was their neighbour. In her cross-examination she has stated that deceased was aged twenty nine years and she was having love affair
with the appellant. She has denied given statement mark A to B in Ex.D-1, wherein it was mentioned that deceased had shown the appellant to her
mother andbrother. She has also admitted in her chief that appellant was known to the deceased for last three years and they had developed
relationship of husband and wife.
Fact that deceased was having love affair with the appellant was thus known to the family members of the deceased and still they were pressing
upon her to marry a boy of their community goes to show that undue pressure was put on the girl and the probable reason of her suicide might be
something else.
In view of the above, judgment and order passed by the Court below cannot be sustained.
The appeal is, accordingly, allowed. Judgment and order passed by the Court below is quashed and set aside. Application for suspension of
sentence stands disposed.
Appellant is directed to furnish personal bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- and a surety bond in the like amount in accordance with Section 437-A of
Cr.P.C. before the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) within two weeks from the date of release to the effect that in the event of filing of Special Leave
Petition against this judgment or on grant of leave, the appellant on receipt of notice thereof, shall appear before the Hon’ble Apex Court. The bail
bond will be effective for a period of six months.
However, looking to the shady investigation done by the police and the fact that this might have been a case of honour killing, I deem it proper to
direct the DG (Crimes) to inquire into the incident and the role of the Investigation Officer, and to take appropriate action, as per law.
Copy of this order be also provided to learned Public Prosecutor.