Kailash
Kaur Vs. State of Punjab [1987] INSC 139 (28 April 1987)
ERADI,
Vs. BALAKRISHNA (J) ERADI, Vs. BALAKRISHNA (J) SEN, A.P. (J) CITATION: 1987 AIR
1368 1987 SCR (2)1221 1987 SCC (2) 631 JT 1987 (2) 278 1987 SCALE (1)1172
ACT:
Indian
Penal Code, 1860: s. 302--Bride Burning--Gruesome murder of young
wife--Barbaric act of pouring kerosene oil and setting her on fire--Duty of the
Court to award maximum penalty.
Criminal
Dial. Dowry death--Necessity to award maximum punishment.
HEADNOTE:
The
prosecution alleged that on the evening of May 30, 1974 the appellant's
daughter caught hold of the deceased, and the appellant poured kerosene oil on
her and set her on fire. On hearing deceased's screams the neighbors rushed to
the house and extinguished the flames. Thereafter, she was taken to the
hospital where on the basis of questions put by the doctor (P.W. 2), Head
Constable (P.W. 7) recorded her statement. She expired on June 1, 1974. It was
further alleged that the husband and his parents were unhappy about the quantum
of dowry brought by the deceased and she was, therefore being subjected to severe
harassment and maltreatment. In a letter written by the deceased to her father
she had set out the details of the iII treatment meted to her and expressed
grave apprehension that her life was in imminent danger.
The
trial court convicted the appellant and her daughter of the offence under s.
302 I.P.C. acting on the dying declaration made by the deceased, the letter
written by her to her father and his evidence as to the demands for dowry and
the torture inflicted on his daughter. The husband was given benefit of doubt
and acquitted.
The
High Court confirmed the conviction of the appellant but acquitted the daughter
giving her benefit of doubt.
Dismissing
the appeal, the Court,
HELD:
1.1. The conviction of the appellant by the High Court was fully justified. The
dying declaration made by the deceased wherein 1222 she has given a clear and
vivid account of the pouring of kerosene oil over her body and being set on
fire by the appellant, has the ring of truth. The testimony of the doctor (P.W.
2) and the Head Constable (P.W. 7) clearly establishes that she was in a fit
condition to make the statement. There was, therefore, no reason whatever not
to act upon it. [1224D; G] 1.2. In addition, there was also clear
circumstantial evidence furnished by the letter written by the deceased to her
father and the testimony of the father regarding the demands for dowry and the
harassment and torture inflicted on the deceased as part of the Endeavour to
extract more dowry. [1224F-G]
2.
Whenever a case of gruesome murder of a young wife by the barbaric process of
pouring kerosene oil over the body and setting her on fire as the culmination
of a long process of physical and mental harassment for extraction of more
dowry comes before the court and the offence is brought home to the accused
beyond reasonable doubt, it is the duty of the court to deal with the case in
the most severe and strict manner and award the maximum penalty prescribed by
the law in order that it may operate as a deterrent to other persons from
committing such anti-social crimes. [1222H; 1223A]
Criminal
Appellate Jurisdiction: Criminal Appeal No. 221 of 1978.
From
the Judgment and Order dated 30.3.1978 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in
Criminal Appeal No. 252 of 1975.
A.N.
Mulla, R.L. Kohli, Harjinder Singh and R.C. Kohli for the Appellants. R.S.
Sodhi for the Respondent.
The.
Judgment of the Court was delivered by Balakrishna Eradi, J. This is yet
another unfortunate instance of gruesome murder of a young wife by the barbaric
process of pouring kerosene oil over the body and setting her on fire as the
culmination of a long process of physical and mental harassment for extraction
of more dowry. Whenever such cases come before the Court and the offence is
brought home to the accused beyond reasonable doubt, it is the duty of the
Court to deal with it in most severe and 1223 strict manner and award the
maximum penalty prescribed by the law in order that it may operate as a
deterrent to other persons from committing such anti-social crimes.
Amandeep
Kaur, deceased, was married to Avtar Singh who figured as the first accused in
the case in the Sessions Court. Kailash Kaur, the appellant, is the
mother-in-law of the deceased and Mahinder Kaur who figured as the third
accused in the case is the sister of Avtar Singh. The husband and his parents
were allegedly unhappy about the quantum of dowry brought by the deceased and
she was being subjected to severe harassment and maltreatment with a view to
extract more dowry from her parents. Exhibit PK is a letter written by the
deceased to her father Avtar Singh (P.W. 3) in which she has set out the
details of the harassment and maltreatment and expressed her grave apprehension
that unless she was immediately taken back to the father's house, her life
itself was in imminent danger. On may 30, 1974, in the evening. Kailash Kaur
and Mahinder Kaur started quarreling with the deceased and severely abused and
threatened her. Thereupon, the deceased went to her room and bolted its door
from inside. Sometime later Avtar Singh, husband of the deceased, came to the
house and started knocking at the door of the said room with great force
because of which the door got unbolted. It would appear that after the door was
opened Avtar Singh went away from the house. It is the prosecution case that
immediately thereafter Mahinder Kaur caught hold of the deceased and Kailash
Kaur (appellant) poured kerosene oil on her and set her on fire. The deceased
started screaming on hearing which the people residing in the locality rushed
to the house. Avtar Singh, the husband also reached there in the meantime, As
she was engulfed in flames, somebody put a blanket on Aman- deep Kaur and
extinguished the flames. Thereafter she was carried to the Civil Hospital,
Hoshiarpur. Dr. Har Parkash Bhatia (P.W. 2), who examined her sent information
to the local police station on receipt of which Head Constable Naranjan Singh
(P.W. 7), went over to the hospital. The doctor sent everybody other than the
Head Constable out of the room where the patient was lying. He told the
deceased that he would put her questions about the cause of her death. On the
basis of the questions put by the doctor, Head Constable Naranjan Singh (P.W.
7) recorded her statement, on the basis of which formal First Information
Report was lodged at Police Station, Hoshiarpur. Amandeep Kaur expired on June
1, 1974.
At
the trial the prosecution relied on Ex. PF/3, the dying declaration made by the
deceased--Amandeep Kaur, the letter Ex. PK writ- 1224 ten by her to her father Atar
Singh (P.W. 3) and the evidence of P.W. 3 wherein he stated that the appellant,
her son and daughter were dissatisfied about the quantum of dowry brought by
Amandeep Kaur and on that account they had been torturing her. The learned
trial Judge acting on the aforesaid evidence convicted Kailash Kaur and
Mahinder Kaur of the offence under Section 302 I.P.C.-and acquitted Avtar
Singh, the husband, accused giving him the benefit of doubt.
Kailash
Kaur and Mahinder Kaur carried the matter in appeal before the High Court of
Punjab and Haryana. The High Court confirmed the conviction of the
appellant--herein namely, Kailash Kaur, but acquitted Mahinder Kaur giving her
the benefit of doubt. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the appellant has
preferred this appeal before this Court after obtaining special leave.
Notwithstanding
the learned and persuasive arguments advanced before us by Shri A.N. Mulla,
Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, we find absolutely no
merit in this appeal. There is no reason whatever not to act upon the dying
declaration of the deceased wherein she has given a clear and vivid account of
the pouring of kerosene oil over body and her being set on fire by the
appellant.
She
had also implicated Mahinder Kaur as the person who held her while the kerosene
oil was being poured on her body by the appellant. We have very grave doubts
about the legality, propriety and correctness of the decision of the High Court
in so far as it has acquitted Mahinder Kaur by giving her the benefit of doubt.
But since the State has not preferred any appeal, we are not called upon to go
into that aspect any further.
In
addition to the dying declaration there is also clear circumstantial evidence
furnished by the fetter Ex. PK and the testimony of Atar Singh (P.W. 3) father
of the deceased regarding the demands for dowry and the harassment and torture
inflicted on the deceased by the accused as part of the endeavour to extract
more dowry. The dying declaration made by the deceased has the ring of truth
and the testimony of the doctor--P.W. 2 and of the Head Constable--P.W. 7
clearly establishes that she was in a fit condition to make the statement. The conviction
of the appellant by the High Court was, therefore, fully justified and there is
absolute- ly no ground for interference with the same by this Court.
We
only express our regret that the Sessions Judge did not treat this as a fit
case for awarding the maximum penalty under the law and that no steps were
taken by the 1225 State Government before the High Court for enhancement of the
sentence.
The
appeal is accordingly dismissed. The bail bond of the appellant will stand
cancelled and she will be taken into custody forthwith to serve out the
remaining portion of her sentence.
P.S.S.
Appeal dismissed.
Back