Rama Tyagi And Anr. vs State
2001 Latest Caselaw 873 Del

JUDGMENT

R.S.Sodhi, J.

1. These Criminal Appeal Nos. 39/1995 and 63/1995 seek to challenge the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge in SC No. 2/1992 dated 10.2.1995 whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge held the appellants guilty under Section 498-A/304-B/34, IPC and further vide a separate Order dated 13.2.1995 sentenced the accused to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years each under Section 304-B, IPC as also to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year each and a fine of Rs.500/-each and in default of payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for three months each under Section 498-A,IPC.

2. Facts giving rise to this case, as have been noted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, are as follows:

"...on 27.11.91, information was received at Police Station Keshav Puram which was recorded vide D.D. No. 8-A. This information was made from publica call office informing the local police that H.No. C-1/89, Lawrence Road, Delhi, where they found that in the bed room of the aforesaid house, Kavita w/o Sanjay Tyagi had been burnt and she had been removed to Hindu Rao Hospital in burnt conditions but on account of the strike at Hindu Rao Hospital, she was not admitted there and was referred to J.P.N. Hospital. Accordingly, ASI went to J.P.N. Hospital where he collected the M.L.C. of the injured Kavita, the doctors declared Kavita as brought dead. Since the incident had taken place before seven years of marriage of Kavita, the S.D.M., Kotwali Sh. Dharmender Sharma then reached the hospital on 28.11.91, and a conducted an enquiry. On 28.11,91, the father of Kavita deceased namely Yashwant Singh then made a statement of the S.D.M. stating that his daughter Kavita was married according to Hindu rites on 23.5.91 to Sanjay Tyagi. Before marriage, there was no demand of dowry either by Sanjay Tyagi or his family members. However, despite there being no demand of dowry, he had spent an amount of Rs. 1,25,000/- on the marriage of Kavita. A list of dowry articles was also prepared and this list was read over in the presence of the respectable persons of the Brathery. No signatures on the list was prepared. In the month of June, 1991, all of a sudden, Kavita came along to his house at Uttam Nagar and she narrated to her mother about the maltreatment by her in -laws who used to make demand for additional dowry. The complainant further stated that in order to maintain his honour and respect in the society, she persuaded Kavita and sent her back to her matrimonial home. Towards the end of June, he himself went to the matrimonial home of Kavita and tried to persuade the in-laws of Kavita. On account of this dispute, Kavita remained with her at her parental house during the month of July. There was intervention by the relatives in the month of August. Kavita was again sent to her matrimonial home. The complainant then went to meet Kavita in the first week of August at her matrimonial home when he noticed that the face of Kavita was swollen. She had been subjected to beating. Kavita had then narrated to him that Sanjay and other members of his family namely his brother Vinod and his mother-in-laws had given severe beating to her. She further narrated on the question of demand of dowry. They generally gave beating to Kavita. However, inspite of these beatings, he again persuaded Kavita to remain at her matrimonial home. However, during the following week, he sent his son to bring Kavita from her matrimonial home at her parental house at Uttam Nagar. After sometime, the mother-in-law of Kavita came to his house along with the some relatives and they insisted that Kavita be sent with them to her matrimonial home. In the month of September-October, Kavita remained at her matrimonial home on account of Diwali festival. However, one week after Diwali, his elder son Umesh went to bring Kavita and at that time, Kavita told Umesh that her in-laws wee making a demand for colour T.V., a motor cycle and a V.C.R. and in case, these articles were not brought by her from her parents, she would be beaten. Umesh in turn conveyed all these cruelties meted out to Kavita to his parents. The complainant immediately gave a ring at the in-laws house of Kavita as there is a telephone in the neighborhood where the matrimonial home of Kavita is situated. On the telephone, Sanjay did not speak anything. He then himself went to the matrimonial home of Kavita. There Kavita repeated all the demands as made by the in-laws to her father as well. He then persuaded Sanjay and his mother and also promised that since he was not financially sound, he would try to meet these demands slowly and slowly and he then returned to his house. 2/3 days thereafter, Sanjay and his brother Vinod again came to Uttam Nagar and made a demand for all the three articles by stating that in case, he did not fulfill those demands, they would desert' Kavita for ever. He then repeated that he was not in a position to meet the unjustified demand and also asked them to leave Kavita at his parental house. On hearing this both the brothers Sanjay and Vinod then left for their house. He did not get in touch with any member of the family of Sanjay thereafter. He stated further that yesterday (his statement was recorded on 28.11.91), he came to know in the evening that Kavita had died. He suspected a foul play in the death of Kavita saying that he had every reason to suspect that in-laws of Kavita had conspired together to finish Kavita for ever.

On the basis of the above statement made before the S.D.M. the learned S.D.M. recommended that a case Under Section 498A/304B/34, IPC be registered.

After the case was registered, the investigation was handed over to SI Satbir Singh. SI Satbir Singh then completed the inquest proceedings, inspected the scene of occurrence, recorded the statement of the witnesses and also go the scene of incident photographed. He also collected the post-mortem report in respect of post-mortem examination on the dead body of Kavita. He also sent the exhibits to the C.F.S.L. laboratory. After collecting sufficient evidence, he arrested the accused persons. After completion of the investigation, the challan was completed and the accused persons were sent up for trial."

3. The prosecution in order to prove the case examined as many as 28 witnesses. Yashwant Singh Tyagi (PW-1), the father of the deceased, has strongly supported the prosecution's case to the effect that Kavita was harassed and physically abused over dowry and that he suspected that Kavita had been driven to commit suicide and that the death of Kavita was as a result of the witnesses' inability to satisfy the demand. He stated that in June, 1991 Kavita had told him that the accused persons were demanding dowry and harassing her on that account. The witness pacified his daughter and sent her back. In the last week of June 1991, he went to the house of the accused persons and explained to them his inability to meet the demand of colour television, VCR and Hero Honda Motor Cycle. Two days thereafter Sanjay left Kavita at the house of this witness and she remained there through July only to be sent back by this witness in August, 1991. In August, 1991 when he visited his daughter, he found that she had been beaten and bore finger marks upon her face. Upon enquiry Kavita told him that she was beaten on account of her inability to satisfy their dowry demands and that she had been threatened to be done away with. This witness returned home and sent his son to fetch kavita, who was then brought home by Umesh in August, 1991. Kavita lived in her parental house up to August, 1991. The accused persons had pressurised him and his family to send Kavita to the matrimonial house. Kavita returned to the matrimonial house on an assurance that she will be well treated. Umesh, her brother, visited Kavita where she narrated to him the beating that she had received at the hands of the accused over lack of dowry. This witness has also deposed to the effect that Sanjay and Vinod came to the house and told him that in the event their demands are not fulfillled, they would leave Kavita. On 27.11.1991 he received an information to the effect that his daughter had died.

4. This statement is corroborated by PW-4 Brij Kishroe, PW-5 Umesh son of Yashwant Singh Tyagi and PW-6 Smt. Kamlesh wife of Yashwant Singh Tyagi, mother of the deceased.

5. As regards the incident itself, the prosecution has examined PW-2 Bansi Lal Gupta, who deposes to the effect that on the fateful day he heard a noise from the house of the accused persons. He went there and found that some was coming from the kitchen and the doors of the house were closed. The crowed tried to break open the door of kitchen first but when they could not break, they broke open the glass of window and entered the kitchen through the said window. He saw the burnt body of the deceased, which was taken out from the said kitchen.

6. PW-9 Joginder Kumar deposes to the effect that on 27.11.1991 he was present in his house when he was informed that a lady had burnt herself. He went to the spot and saw smoke coming out of the window of the kitchen. The door of the room was opened. When he reached there, he saw Kavita wife of the accused Sanjay in a burning condition in the room; a bed, pillow, fridge, stove, kitchen articles; the Roti on the stove were also lying in the said room. He further deposes to the effect that the above bed was also burnt but the said bed of room was not smelling of any kerosene oil. this witness was declared hostile and confronted with the previous statement exhibit porion B to B of Ex. PW-9/A where this witness had stated that the smell of kerosene oil was coming from the kitchen and the clothes. He was also confronted with portion C to C of Ex. PW-9/A where he had stated that it appeared that Kavita had poured kerosene oil over her and set herself on fire.

7. PW-11 Manohar Lal deposes to the effect that on 27.11.1991 at about 2 p.m. he heard a noise and came to know that wife of accused Sanjay Tyagi got burnt. He went to the spot and found a crowd gathered there. A blanket had been put on Kavita when she was taken to the hospital in a taxi.

8. PW-13 Constable Virender Singh deposes to the effect that on 27.11.1991 he had joined the investigation with the Investigating Officer and found Kavita in burnt condition in the kitchen of the house where the incident took place. Kavita was taken to the Hindu Rao Hospital where she could not be admitted on account of strike by the doctors and she was taken to the JPN Hospital where she was declared brought dead. He took the body to the mortuary for post-mortem and after the post-mortem delivered the same to the legal claimants.

9. PW-15 Dr. Satish Kumar deposes to the effect that on 28.11.1991 he conducted post-mortem examination on the body of Kavita and gave a report Ex. PW-15/A. In his opinion the death was due to burn stocks from extensive burns hair on the head.

10. PW-17 Constable Ramesh states that on 28th November, 1991 he was posted a Police Station Keshav Puram and joined the investigation with the Investigating Officer SI Satbir Singh. This witness went to the JPN Hospital after taking the copy of the FIR and record from the duty officer and handed over the same to the investigating Officer in the hospital. This witness came to the spot with the Investigating Officer from the hospital and the IO had lifted and seized stove and a steel Katora vide seizure memo Ex. PW-17/A.

11. PW-19 Head Constable Jodh Singh deposes to the effect that while working as Malkhana Moharrar on 28.11.1991, 5/6 parcels were deposited with him. These parcels were sent to the CFSL on 2.12.1991 through Constable Ram Kumar vide Road Certificate No. 85/21.

12. PW-20 ASI Sultan Singh is the one who along with Constable Virender Singh went to spot where the body of the lady was lying in burnt condition in the kitchen. He took the injured to the hospital where Kavita was received as having been brought dead.

13.PW-27 SI Satbir Singh has stated that ASI Sultan Singh along with Constable Virender Singh reached H.No. C-1/89, Keshav Puram where they found the body in burnt condition. ASI Sultan Singh took the injured to the hospital. This witness deposes to the affect that post-mortem of the body was got conducted. SDM conducted the inquest proceedings and after recording statement of Yashwant Singh Tyagi case under Section 498-A/304-B/34, IPC was registered. This witness prepared the site plan Ex. PW-27/A and took into possession steel Katora and the stove. According to this witness there was a smell of kerosene in the stove as well as in the Katora. He recorded the statement of the witnesses. This witness obtained the CFSL report vide Ex.27/C, which report gave a finding that analysis of Ex. P2 show the presence of kerosene residue.

14. The main thrust of the learned Counsel for the appellants is to the effect that the prosecution has not been able to rule out the possibility of an accident and, therefore, cannot attract the provisions of Section 304-B, IPC.

15. Having heard learned Counsel and carefully perused the evidence on record, I am of the view that the prosecution has ben able to establish its case firstly on the question of demand of dowry, which is proved by tendering into evidence of PWs 1,4,5 and 6, who categorically state that Kavita was being harassed on account of inadequacy of dowry and non-fulfilment of demands. On the question of whether Kavita died as a result of an accidental kitchen fire or she doused herself with kerosene and then set for to herself can only be deduced from circumstances. There is evidence on record to show that there was a stove on which Kavita was cooking. There is also evidence to show that the Lota was smelling of kerosene oil. It is also in evidence that the hair of Kavita had kerosene residue. There is nothing on record to suggest that the fire was accidental. The presence of kerosene in the hair of the deceased, the recovery of Lota smelling of kerosene and the recovery of a stove which did not show any sign of having burst are all points indicating that the fire was not accidental. It can safely be deduced that Kavita poured kerosene over herself and torched herself. This is further supported by the fact that the doors of room had to be broken open and nobody was present in the house when Kavita is said to have burnt. The chain of evidence and circumstances brought out by the prosecution lend assurance to the deduction that Kavita was harassed on account of dowry leading her to take this extreme step of committing suicide.

16. Having examine of the evidence on record and also the judgment under challenge, I am satisfied that the prosecution has been able to prove it case and, therefore, the judgment under challenge does not suffer from any infirmity.

In this view of the matter Criminal Appeal Nos. 39/1995 and 63/1995 are dismissed.

17. Appeals dismissed.