http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 6  

PETITIONER: VIRBHAN SINGH AND ANR.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF U.P.

DATE OF JUDGMENT12/08/1983

BENCH: ERADI, V. BALAKRISHNA (J) BENCH: ERADI, V. BALAKRISHNA (J) VENKATARAMIAH, E.S. (J)

CITATION:  1983 AIR 1002            1983 SCR  (3) 600  1983 SCC  (4) 197        1983 SCALE  (2)91

ACT:      Evidence-Circurmstantial evidence-Several circumstances supported by  medical evidence  lead to  the only conclusion that the  deceased was murdered in a most brutal and heinous fashion and  then hung  by rope by the accused so as to give an appearance of a case of suicide - Conviction and sentence for the offence of murder should be confirmed.

HEADNOTE:      For the  offence of  murder of  Smt. Gyani, her husband Virbhan Singh  his mother  Smt. Gyani  Devi (both appellants before the  Supreme Court) alongwith his father Sileti Singh were arraigned  before life Sessions Judge, Etawah, u/s. 302 read with  Section 34  Indian Penal  Code. According  to the prosecution the  motive was the selfish animal nature in the husband and  his parents  which has  come out in the form of their determination  that the  husband should  remarry after doing away  with the  obstacle in  the shape of his existing wife on the sole ground that she was inauspicious due to the fact that  she did  not bear children for four or five years after the  marriage and  that  even  though  thereafter  she conceived twice  and successfully  gave birth  to  two  male babies, both those babies did not survive beyond a few weeks or days.  The further  evidence of the prosecution were that the accused  assaulted the deceased and then hung her with a rope to  give the  impression of  suicide,  did  not  inform anyone and  kept the  body in the room, that an attempt made by Sileti  Singh to  remove the body in a lorry failed, that when P.W.1, the sister of the deceased went along with P.W.4 her brother-in-law  to see  the  deceased  on  the  14th  of August, 1968, the husband and the mother told a lie that the deceased had  gone out  to get  medicine, that  again on the 15th August,  1968 after  P.W,l’s repeated  insistence,  the dead body  was shown  to her in a decomposed condition, that Sileti Singh  only thereafter  lodged a report at the police station  Jawaharnagar   to  the  effect  that  the  deceased committed suicide  which version  was accepted by the Police and the  Panchas; that  on the insistance of P.W.1, the dead body was  sent for  postmortem, that the postmortem revealed (a) five  antemortem injuries  including the breakage of the right side  hyoid bone  under the  ligature mark,  (b) death should have  taken place  between 5.30  P.M. On August 13th,

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 6  

1968 and  5.30 A.M:  on August 14th, 1968, (c) death was due to shock  and haemorrhage as a result of injury to liver aud stomach as well as asphyxia due to hanging and (d) inview of the antemortem  injuries found, there was little possibility of the deceased hanging herself.      The Sessions  Judge found,  on a careful and analytical consideration of  the  evidence,  all  the  accused  guilty, convicted them  under Section  302 I.P.C.  and sentenced the three of them to life imprisonment. In the appeal filed the 601 High Court  confirmed the  conviction and  sentence  of  the present appellants  and acquitted  Sileti Singh, the father. There was no appeal by the State against the acquittal.      Dismissing the appeal, the Court ^      HELD:  1:  1.  The  conviction  and  senctence  of  the appellants are  perfectly correct  and sound,  as  they  are guilt of  the murder of the deceased in a brutal and heinous fashion.      1: 2.  The case no doubt turns purely on circumstantial evidence. But the circumstances are so telling that the only conclusion reasonably  possible is the one arrived at by the courts below  that the  deceased did  not commit  suicide by hanging hereself  but was  done to  death by  being brutally assaulted and  thereafter hung  by the neck with a rope. The medical evidence  clearly goes  to prove  that it  would not have been  possible for  the  deceased,  who  had  sustained severe injuries  of the  type and  nature described  in  the post-mortem  report  in  the  stomach  and  liver,  to  hang herself.  The   husband,  Virbhan   Singh  and  his  mother, Smt.Gyani Devi,  were throughout present in the house and no outsider had  come  to  the  house  at  the  relevant  time. According to  the opinion of the doctor, the latest point of time at  which the  death of  the deceased  could have taken place was  5,30 a.m. On 14.8.1968 but even on the evening of that day  when P.W.1,  Shrimati Ram  Kumari, sister  of  the deceased went  to their house and enquired for the deceased, she was  told by  Virbhan Singh  and  his  mother  that  the deceased had  gone out  with the  father-in-law for  getting some medicine.  On the  next day (15th August, 1968) rumours spread in  the village  that the  deceased had  been done to death and  it was  only  when  P.W.  l  accompanied  by  her brother-in-law, P.W.  4 went to the house of the accused and insisted on  being shown  the  body  that  she  was  finally allowed to  see the  dead body of her sister which, by then, was already  in a  state of decomposition. Significantly, it is only  subsequent thereto  that Sileti  Singh went  to the police Station  and  lodged  the  report  stating  that  the deceased had  committed suicide  by hanging.  The conduct of the  appellants   is  consistent   only  with  their  active involvement in  the commission of the crime. It has come out in the  evidence that on the evening of the 14th August 1968 at about 7.30 or 8.00 p.m. Sileti Singh had made attempts to remove clandestinely  the dead  body from  the locality  for which purpose  he had  met Brahma  Nand (P.W.  3),  a  truck owner,  and  unsuccessfully  tried  to  hire  his  truck  to transport the dead body.                                           [605 G-H, 606 A-E]      Observations (i)  If society  should be  ridden of this growing evil,  it  is  imperative  that  whenever  dastardly crimes of  this nature  are detected and the offence brought home to  the accused, the courts must deal with the offender most ruthlessly and impose deterrent punishment. [602 E]      (ii) Most  strangely, in  spite of  the body being in a fairly advanced  state  of  decomposition,  thereby  clearly

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 6  

indicating that  the death had taken place a long time prior to the  report given  by Sileti  Singh,  which  should  have normally aroused  serious  suspicion  in  the  mind  of  any reasonable person about the 602 version of  suicide given  by him, the Sub-Inspector and the panchas were  inclined to  record  the  cause  of  death  as suicide by  hanging and  close the  case without any further investigation. [603 H-604 A]      (iii) Though  the reasons  stated by  the High Court in acquitting Sileti  Singh by  giving the benefit of doubt are not sound  and convincing  since the State has not preferred an appeal, his acquittal will stand. [606 F-G]

JUDGMENT:      CRIMINAL APPELLATE  JURISDICTION: Criminal  Appeal  No. 154 of 1974.      From the  Judgment and  order dated the 25th September, 1973 of  the Allahabad  High Court  in Criminal Appeal No. 1 809 of 1969.      R.R Garg,  V. J.  Francis and  Nikhil Chandra  for  the appellants.      Dalveer Bhandari.  H. M.  Singh and  Ranbir Singh Yadav for the respondent.      The following Judgment of the Court was delivered by:      BALAKRISHNA  ERADI   J.  It   is  an   unfortunate  and disturbing phenomenon that has recently arisen in many parts of  our   country  that   instances  of  bride  killing  are alarmingly on  the increase.  If society should be ridden of this growing  evil, it is imperative that whenever dastardly crimes of  this nature  are detected and the offence brought home to  the accused, the courts must deal with the offender most ruthlessly  and impose  deterrent punishment.  The case before us is one of its kind. While, in the vast majority of such cases,  the harassment  and killing  of  the  bride  is traceable to  the  abominable  and  pernicious  practice  of demanding and  extracting dowry  and the failure on the part of the  bride’s parents  to adequately  satisfy  the  greedy demands of  the husband’s people, the reason for the torture and murder of the innocent wife in the present case was that she was  considered an "inauspicious" girl. That was for the reason that she did not bear children for four or five years after the marriage and even though thereafter, she conceived twice and  successively gave  birth to two male babies, both those babies  did not  survive beyond  a few  weeks or days. Having branded  the young  wife as inauspicious, the selfish animal nature in the husband and his parents came out in the form of  their determination that the husband should remarry after doing  away with  the obstacle  in the  shape  of  his existing wife. That led the husband and his mother to commit the dastardly  murder Of  the young  wife in a most gruesome fashion . 603      Sileti Singh,  his wife,  Smt. Gyani Devi, and his son, Virbhan Singh,  were arraigned  before the  Sessions  Judge, Etawah, charged  with the  murder of Smt. Gyani, the wife of Virbhan Singh, in furtherance of the common intention of all of them,  by intentionally  causing  death  by  beating  the deceased and  then hanging her with a rope. The deceased was married to  Virbhan Singh about 9 years prior to the time of the occurrence.  She did  not give  birth to  any child  for about five  to six  years after  marriage. According  to the prosecution case,  the  husband  of  the  deceased  and  his

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 6  

parents used  to harass her and beat her on this account and they used  to say  that they  would get  the second marriage performed for  Virbhan Singh.  In or  about the seventh year after the  marriage, the deceased gave birth to a male child but that  child survived  only for  about 9  or  10  months. There- -  after, the  ill-treatment of  the deceased  at the hands of  the husband  and  his  parents  is  said  to  have commenced again.  A few  months prior to the occurrence, the deceased gave  birth to another male child but that baby too died within  6 or  7 days  of its  birth  This  precipitated matters and  the deceased is said to have been branded as an "inauspicious" woman, who could no longer be retained in the family. According  to the  prosecution,  she  used  to  make complaints of  severe  harassment  by  the  accused  to  her sister, Shrimati  Ram Kumari (P.W.1), who too was married to a person  in the  same village-Nangla  Incha. On 14th August 1968 at about 5.00 p,m., Shrimati Ram Kumari had gone to the house of the deceased with an intent to meet her but she was told by  the husband,  Virbhan Singh and his mother that the deceased had  gone with  the father-in  law to  obtain  some medicine. The  next morning, P.W 1 heard a general rumour in the village that her sister had been killed. There upon, she called her  husband’s younger brother, Krishna Gopal (P.W.4) and again  went to  the house of the accused along with him. She found  Virbhan Singh and his mother, Smt. Gyani Devi, in the house  and she  asked them  to show her the dead body of the deceased.  At first  they refused  but on  a hue and cry being raised  by her, they showed her the dead body lying in a roon  in a  swollen condition,  emitting a  foul smell. On 15th August  1968, at  about 9.30 a.m. Sileti Singh lodged a report at the Police Station Jaswantnagar to the effect that the deceased had committed suicide by hanging herself with a rope. Sub-Inspector  Netrapal Singh  (P.W. 11)  went to  the place of  occurrence and  held an  inquest on  the dead body with the  assistance t  of panchas. Most strangely, in spite of  the   body  being   in  a   fairly  advanced   state  of decomposition, thereby clearly indicating that the death had taken place a long time prior to the report given by Sileti 604 Singh, which  should have normally aroused serious suspicion in the  mind of  any reasonable  person about the version of suicide given by him, the Sub-Inspector and the panchas were inclined to  record the cause of death as suicide by hanging and  close  the  case  without  any  further  investigation. However, Ram Kumari (P.W.1) and her brother-in-law, Krishn a Gopal (P.W.4), strongly protested and demanded that the body should be sent for post-mortem and due to their persistence, the request  was acceded to. The post-mortem examination was conducted by  Dr. Lakhotia  on 15-8-1968 at 5.30 p m. In the opinion of the doctor, the death had taken place between one and a half to two days prior to the time of his examination, i.e. between 5.30  p.m. On  13-8-1968 and 5.30 a.m. On 14-8- 1968. The  post-mortem report  disclosed that there were the following  ante   mortem  injuries  on  the  person  of  the deceased.      1.    Ligature  mark 8"  x 1/2" on the neck in the           upper part  between larynx and chin, in front           and  on   sides  just   below  the  chin.  On           dissection the  margins were found congested.           It was  directed upwards  obliquely following           the lower jaw and was almost behind. Its base           was pale, hard and leathery.      2.    Abrasion 1-1/2" x1/2" on the neck lower part           left side.      3.   Contusion covering whole of the upper eye lid

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 6  

         of left eye. Conjunctive was congested.      4.   Contusion covering the whole of upper eye lid           of right eye. Conjunctive was congested.      5.    Contusion  4" x  4" on  the chest  left side           upper part below the clavicle.           Under the  ligature  mark  greater  curve  of           hyoid bone  was broken  on  the  right  side.           There was  congestion around  the big vessels           of the neck. The lower  ribs of the deceased from 8th to 10th on the left side were  found  broken.  The  abdomen  was  distended  and discoloration was  present in  the  flanks.  Peritoneum  was deeply congested.  The abdominal  cavity was  full of  blood weighing about 1-1/2 Ibs. There 605 was a  big tear  6" long in the stomach. The abdominal walls were congested.  There was a lacerated wound 3"x 1/2" on the front of left lobe of the liver. Both kidneys were congested and decomposing.  Both sides of her heart were empty. Larynx was congested  deeply. Both  lungs were deeply congested and deeply decomposing.  The large vessels were congested in the neck on  both sides. In the opinion of the doctor, the death was due  to shock  and haemorrhage  as a result of injury to liver and  stomach as  well as  asphyxia due to hanging. The doctor, on being examined as a witness, stated categorically that in  view  of  the  injuries  mentioned  in  post-mortem report, there was little possibility of the deceased hanging herself.      The sessions  Judge found,  on a careful and analytical consideration  of  the  evidence,  that  the  death  of  the deceased was caused as a result of the injuries inflicted on her by  the accused, followed by asphyxiation resulting from the deceased having been hung by her neck by the accused. He found all  the accused  guility of  the offence  of  murder, convicted them  u/s 302  I.P.C. and sentenced the three of P them to  undergo imprisonment  for life. In the appeal filed by the  three accused,  the High Court confirmed the finding that the  case was  not one of suicide but one of calculated murder, the hanging by rope being part of the process of the deceased being  put to  death by  her assailants.  The  High Court, however,  took the  view that  the presence of Sileti Singh at  the time  of the  commission of  offence  was  not established beyond  doubt and  hence it acquitted him giving him the  benefit of  doubt. The  conviction of Virbhan Singh and  his  mother,  Smt.  Gyani  Devi,  uls  302  I.P.C.  was confirmed by  the High Court. This appeal has been preferred by the afore-mentioned two accused.      We find  no merit at all in the appeal. Since we are in complete agreement with the findings entered by the Sessions Judge and the High Court regarding the cause of the death of the deceased  and the manner in which she was done to death, it is  unnecessary for  us to  burden this  judgment with  a repetition of the details of the evidence. The case no doubt turns   purely   on   circumstantial   evidence.   But   the circumstances  are  so  telling  that  the  only  conclusion reasonably possible  is the  one arrived  at by  the  courts below that  the deceased  did not  commit suicide by hanging herself but  was done  to death by being brutually assaulted and thereafter hung by the neck with 606 a rope.  The medical  evidence clearly goes to prove that it would not  have been  possible for  the  deceased,  who  had sustained severe  injuries of  the type and nature described in the  post-mortem report in the stomach and liver, to hang herself. The  husband, Virbhan  Singh and  his mother,  Smt.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 6  

Gyani Devi,  were throughout  present in  the house  and  no outsider had  come  to  the  house  at  the  relevant  time. According to  the opinion of the doctors the latest point of time at  which the  death of  the deceased  could have taken place was  5.30 a.m. on 14-8-1968 but even on the evening of that day  when P.W.  1, Shrimati  Ram Kumari,  sister of the deceased went  to their house and enquired for the deceased, she was  told by  Virbhan Singh  and  his  mother  that  the deceased had  gone out  with the  father-in-law for  getting some medicine.  On the  next day  (15th August 1968) rumours spread in  the village  that the  deceased had  been done to death and it was only when P.W.l accompanied by her brother- in-law, P.W  4 went to the house of the accused and insisted on being  shown the body that she was finally allowed to see the dead body of her sister which, by then, was already in a state of decomposition. Significantly, it is only subsequent thereto that  Sileti Singh  went to  the Police  Station and lodged the  report stating  that the deceased had commit ted suicide  by  hanging.  The  conduct  of  the  appellants  is consistent  only   with  their  active  involvement  in  the commission of  the crime.  It has  come out  in the evidence that on the evening of the 14th August 1968 at about 7.30 or 8.00  p.m.   Sileti  Singh   had  made  attempts  to  remove clandestinely the  dead body  from the  locality  for  which purpose he  had met  Brahma Nand (P.W.3), a truck owner, and unsuccessfully tried to hire his truek to transport the dead body      On a  scrutiny of  the evidence, we age fully satisfied that the  conclusion recorded  by the learned Sessions Judge and by the High Court, that the appellants are guilty of the murder of the deceased in a most brutal and heinous fashion, is perfectly  correct and  sound. We  may observe  that  the reasons stated by the High Court in acquitting Sileti Singh, by giving  him the benefit of doubt, have not appealed to us as  sound  and  convincing  but  since  the  State  has  not preferred an appeal, his acquittal will stand.      In  the   result,  the   conviction  and  sentence  are confirmed in  respect of  Virbhan Singh  and Smt. Gyani Devi and this  appeal is dismissed. The appellants will forthwith surrender to  their bail  bonds and  will be  taken into the custody to serve out their sentence. S.R,                                       Appeal dismissed. 607