http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 12  

PETITIONER: BHAGWANT SINGH

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, DELHI

DATE OF JUDGMENT06/05/1983

BENCH: PATHAK, R.S. BENCH: PATHAK, R.S. BHAGWATI, P.N.

CITATION:  1983 AIR  826            1983 SCR  (3) 109  1983 SCC  (3) 344        1983 SCALE  (1)611  CITATOR INFO :  E          1985 SC 195  (5,24)

ACT:      Code of  Criminal Procedure,  1973 (Act  II  of  1974), Section 174-Police  enquiry,  investigation  and  report  on receipt of  information that  a person has committed suicide and inquest  by the  Magistrate-Court’s  power  to  examine, before the  commencement of  a  trial,  whether  the  police authorities conducted themselves as law and justice required of them, as a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution- Probative value  of investigation  by the  Police, including recovery of material objects to connect the crime, recording of  statements   of  all   important  witnesses   etc.  etc. explained, and  suggestions for  extension of Coroners’ Act, 1871 to  all States  made-Constitution of India, Article 32, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Sections 173(2),174 & 175.

HEADNOTE:      The petitioner  Bhagwant Singh  a member  of the Indian Revenue Service  applied to  the Court  for intervention and necessary relief  in the  matter of the death of his married daughter  Gurinder   Kaur  alleging   that  due  to  several circumstances  he   was  convinced  that  his  daughter  was murdered in  the house of her parent’s-in-law by burning her and that the police investigation was improper and irregular and ineffective.      According to  the  petitioner:  (i)  that  he  and  his daughter were  opposed to  the evils of the dowry system and therefore, with  a  stipulation  that  no  dowry  should  be demanded at the time of the marriage he gave his daughter to one Amarjit Singh, son of his colleague Kartar Singh Sawhney and a  friend for  over thirty  years; (ii)  that after  the marriage his  daughter came to be ill-treated by her mother- in-law hinting  that gifts  and jewellery were expected from her parents and such oppressive tensions at home resulted in the mis-carriage  of a  child, from  which time  onwards the mother-in-law taunted  her saying  that unless  she observed the family tradition of presenting a necklace to her mother- in-law she would remain without a child; (iii) that sometime later, the son-in-law got it conveyed to Bhagwant Singh that he required  Rs. 50,000 for financing his business which was not acceded  to; (iv) that on August 9, 1980 i.e. ten months

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 12  

after the  marriage his  daughter was  found dead  of  third degree burns  from a  kerosene fire in the bath room and was admitted in the Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital by her father-in- law at  12.15 P.M.;  (v) that  the police  did not  get  the statement of  his daughter  recorded though  she was able to speak; (vi)  that the  police added  section 4  of the Dowry Prohibition Act  to the charge on November 29, 1980 and only on May  15, 1981 a reference to section 306 IPC was included in the  F.I.R.; and  (vii) that the police failed to examine material  witnesses   and  recover   material  objects   and proceeded in a leisurely manner. 110      The Court  admitted the  writ petition  and called  for full details  from the Inspector General of Police about the investigation of  the case  and the circumstances leading to the non-filing  of the  report under  section 173(2)  of the Code of Criminal Procedure.      Disposing of the Writ Petition and directing the C.B.I. to complete the investigation within three months, the Court ^      HELD: 1:1  Disappointing as  it may  seem to  those who have desired the institution of criminal action on the basis that a crime has been committed, the material on record does not, however, justify an order to that effect by the Supreme Court. The  investigation of the case now stands transferred to the C.B.I. at the instance of the petitioner. [123 E-F]      1:2. It is not possible, in this case, nor indeed would it be  right for  the Court  to do  so, to  enter  into  the question whether  Gurinder Kaur  committed  suicide  or  was murdered. That is a matter which is properly involved in the trial  of   a  criminal   charge  by   a  court   possessing jurisdiction. [114 G-H]      2:1. The police  did not  display the  promptitude  and efficiency which  the investigation  of the  case  required. There is  much that  calls for  comment. Though the CD entry made on  August 9,  1980  indicates  the  visit  of  a  sub- inspector to  the place of occurrence and seizure of several things, the blanket with which the fire is said to have been put out  has not  been seized.  On the  next  day  when  the experts from the Central Forensic Science Laboratory visited the place  for getting any chance prints, the mirror was not taken possession  of, nor  was the  report obtained for full five weeks. In cases such as this, it would have been of the essence that on visiting the place of occurrence immediately on information  of the incident, the mirror should have been taken  into   possession  by  the  police  and  handed  over forthwith to the Central Forensic Science Laboratory experts for  an  urgent  report  in  regard  to  the  existence  and identification of  the prints.  Delay in  such a  matter  is vital and  can often  result in  the loss of valuable clues. Since Ramu  the servant  was  reported  to  have  helped  in forcing open  the door  of the  bathroom, he  was a material witness for  deposing whether  the bathroom was latched from inside and had to be forced open or was in fact latched from outside. It  was only  as late as January 25,1981, according to entry  CD 13  of that date, that Ramu was examined by the Station House Officer. Strangely he was allowed to leave the town and go to his village before he could be fully examined by  the  police.  There  is  no  evidence  that  the  police expressed  any   anxiety  to  put  him  through  a  thorough examination immediately  or shortly  after the  date of  the occurrence or  at least  before Shri  Kartar Singh’s  family allowed Ramu  to leave  the town  for his  village. The fact that the  investigation by the Delhi Police does not inspire confidence is  clear from  the memorandum dated May 12, 1981

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 12  

issued by  the Crime  Branch to  the Deputy  Commissioner of Police to  the effect that the statement of several material witnesses had not been recorded.                                   [118 B-H, 119 A-B, 120 B]      2:2  The investigation  by  the  police  following  the occurrence was  desultory and lackadaisical, and showed want of appreciation of the emergent need 111 to get at the truth of the case. Whatever may be the reason, there is  no  doubt  that  the  investigation  of  the  case suffered  from   casualness,  lack   of   incisiveness   and unreasonable dilatoriness,  and this  is  demonstrated  most effectively by  the manner in which the case was passed from one police official to another, being entrusted successively to sub-Inspectors  and Inspectors  each of  whom already had his hands  full with  the  investigation  of  several  other cases. There  is the  admission that  these police  officers were not only preoccupied with numerous other cases in their hands but  they were officers who were also required to look after the day to day work of the police station. It was only when  on  the  repeated  and  insistent  petitions  of  Shri Bhagwant Singh the case passed into the control of the Crime Branch that  the investigation showed some signs of speeding up. Secondly,  the haphazard  maintenance of  a police  case diary not  only does  no credit  to  those  responsible  for maintaining it  but defeats the very purpose for which it is required to  be maintained.  It is  of the utmost importance that the  entries in a police Case Diary should be made with promptness, in sufficient detail, mentioning all significant facts, in  careful chronological  order  and  with  complete objectivity. [120 E-H, 121 A.B]      2.3 In  a case  such as this, the death of a young wife must be attributed either to the commission of a crime or to the  fact   that.  mentally   tortured  by  the  suffocating circumstances surrounding  her, she committed suicide. Young woman of  education, intelligence  and character  do not set fire to  themselves unless  provoked and  compelled to  that desperate step  by the  intolerance of  their  misery.  Such cases evidence a deep-seated malady in our social order. The greed  for   dowry,  and  indeed  the  dowry  system  as  an institution, calls  for  the  severest  condemnation  lt  is evident  that   legislative  measures   such  as  the  Dowry Prohibition Act have not met with the success for which they were designed. Perhaps, legislation in itself cannot succeed in  stamping  out  such  an  evil,  and  the  solution  must ultimately be found in the conscience and will or the social community and  in its  active expression  through legal  and constitution methods. [121 C-E]      3. The Court suggested the following-      (i) Where  the death  in such  cases is due to a crime, the perpetrators  of the  crime not infrequently escape from the  nemesis   of  the  law  because  of  inadequate  police investigation. It  would be of considerable assistance if an appropriately high  priority was  given to  the  expeditious investigation  of  such  cases,  if  a  special  magisterial machinery  was   created  for  the  purpose  of  the  prompt investigation of such incidents, and efficient investigative techniques and  procedures were  adopted taking into account the peculiar features of such cases;                                                    [121 F-G]      (ii) A  female police  officer of  sufficient rank  and status in  the police  force should  be associated  with the investigation from  its very  inception. There  are  evident advantages  in  that.  In  a  case  where  a  wife  dies  in suspicious  circumstances   in  her   husband’s   home   its

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 12  

invariably a  matter of considerable difficulty to ascertain the precise circumstances in which the incident occurred. As the incident  takes place  in the  home of  the husband  the material witnesses are 112 usually the  husband and  his parents  or other relations of the husband  staying with him. Whether it was cooking at the kitchen stove  which was  responsible for  the accident  or, according  to  the  inmates  of  the  house,  there  was  an inexplicable urge  to suicide  or whether  indeed the  young wife was  the victim of a planned murder are matters closely involving  the   intimate  knowledge   of  a  woman’s  daily existence. [121 H, 122 A-B]      If the incident is the result of a crime by the husband or his  family, the  problem of  ascertaining the  truth  is burdened by  the privacy  in which the incident occurred. In the circumstances  where it  is possible to record the dying declaration of  the victim,  it would  be more  conducive to securing the truth if the victim made the declaration in the presence of  a female  police officer who can be expected to inspire confidence in the victim. Psychological factors play their part,  and their  role cannot be ignored. A young wife can be  the subject  of varying psychological pressures, and because that  is  so  the  nuances  of  feminine  psychology support the  need for  including a  female police officer as part or the investigating force; and [122 C-E]      (iii)  The  need  to  extend  the  application  of  the Coroners’ Act,  1871 to  other cities besides those where it operates already.  The application of the Coroners’ Act will make possible  an immediate  inquiry into  the death  of the victim, whether  it has  been caused  by accident, homicide, suicide or suddenly by means unknown. lt contains provisions which are entirely salutary for the purpose of such inquiry, and an inquiry under that enactment would be more meaningful and effective and complete than one under ss. 174 and 175 of the Code  of Criminal  Procedure. The procedure contemplated by the  Coroners’ Act,  ensures that  the inquiry  into  the death is  held by  a  person  of  independent  standing  and enjoying judicial  powers, with  a status  and  jurisdiction commensurate with  the necessities  of such  cases  and  the assistance of an appropriate machinery. [122 F-H, 123 B-C]

JUDGMENT:      ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition No. 6607 of 1981.      Kapil Sibal (A.C.) for the Petitioner.      N.C.  Talukdar   and  R.N.  Poddar  with  him  for  the Respondent.      Miss A. Subhashini for CBI.      Daniel  Latiffi  and  N.K  Agarwal  with  him  for  the Intervener.      The Judgment of the Court was delivered by      PATHAK, J.  The petitioner,  Shri Bhagwant  Singh,  has applied to  this Court for relief in the matter of the death of his married daughter, Gurinder Kaur. 113 Shri Bhagwant  Singh is  a  member  of  the  Indian  Revenue Service. His  daughter, Gurinder  Kaur,  was  one  of  three children. She  was an  intelligent  and  talented  girl  who secured a first division in the Senior Cambridge Examination and had  obtained a  B. Sc.  (Home Science) Degree from Lady Irwin College.  She  was  endowed  with  good  looks  and  a pleasing  personality,  and  her  education  and  deportment attracted notice.  It is  apparent that the father was proud

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 12  

of his daughter.      Shri Bhagwant  Singh and Shri Kartar Singh Sawhney were colleagues in  the office.  They had  been friends  for over thirty years.  Shri Kartar  Singh has  a son, Amarjit Singh. The family  lived at  J-7/93, Rajouri Garden, New Delhi. The son ran  a motor  parts shop  at Kashmere  Gate,  Delhi.  It appears that  the  two  colleagues  decided  on  a  marriage between Gurinder Kaur and Amarjit Singh in view of the close association of the two families.      From the  very beginning, it seems, Shri Bhagwant Singh was opposed  to the  evils of  the  dowry  system,  and  the sentiment was  also deeply  entrenched in Gurinder Kaur for, it appears, she along with other girls of her college signed a pledge  in favour of the "anti-dowry movement". According. to Shri  Bhagwant Singh,  there was  an express  stipulation between the  respective  parents  that  no  dowry  would  be demanded in  the marriage. The marriage started off well and the young  couple enjoyed  a harmonious relationship for the first few  months. But  very soon,  it is  alleged, Gurinder Kaur became  conscious of broad hints from her mother-in-law that gifts in the shape of money and jewellery were expected from her  parents. Shri  Bhagwant Singh,  on being formed of this, decided to ignore it, firm inn his conviction that any insidious  attempt   to  extract   a  dowry  should  not  be countenanced. It  is alleged  that from  this point Gurinder Kaur became  the victim  of constant  ill-treatment  by  her mother-in-law. She  was carrying  a  baby,  but  amidst  the oppressive tensions  at home  she suffered a miscarriage and was admitted to a Nursing Home.      According  to   Shri  Bhagwant   Singh,  his   daughter continued to  be ill-treated  and  was  often  taunted  that unless the  observed the  family tradition  of presenting  a necklace to  her  mother-in-law  she  would  remain  without child. It  is  said  that  the  pressure  on  Gurinder  Kaur continued unabated,  and it  was not long before her husband got it  conveyed to  Shri Bhagwant  Singh that  he  required about 114 Rs. 50,000  for financing  his business.  As  Shri  Bhagwant Singh remained  firm in  his resolve  not to  yield to these pressures, it  is alleged  that the  girl  continued  to  be harassed and  her parents-in-law  made it  plain to her that they regretted  the marriage.  The attitude and relations of her husband  and his  family towards  her went  from bad  to worse, and  the regard which ordinarily a bride in the house can expect to receive was replaced by a continuing scorn and contempt and  ill-will. It  must be  recalled that  Gurinder Kaur was  a girl  of good  family, of  refined character and well educated.  Brought up  in a home where the dowry system was regarded  as an  evil to  be opposed, it can be presumed that she rebelled strongly against the attempts at extortion directed against her father. It is reasonable to assume that the relations  between  the  young  husband  and  wife  were vitiated by  bitter discord,  and that she lived in the home in an atmosphere of open and continuous hostility.      On August  9, 1980,  ten  months  after  the  marriage, Gurinder Kaur,  aged 22 years was found dead of third degree burns from  a kerosene  fire in  the bath room. According to the family  of Kartar  Singh, all  the members of the family had proceeded  to the  Gurudwara Bangla  Sahib in  the early morning, and on their return the girl had prepared breakfast for the eight members of the family. She and her husband ate breakfast later  and, it  is said, the husband left for work about 10.  30 A.M.  Within an  hour thereafter, the girl was found dead in the bathroom. The tragedy occasioned universal

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 12  

distress, and  on the  versions put  out by  the  newspapers agitated letters condemning the dowry system and calling for urgent legislative  and social  measures for  reform  poured into the  press. The  police authorities,  it seems, tend to believe that  the case was one of suicide, but Shri Bhagwant Singh is convinced that murder cannot be ruled out.      It is not possible in this case, nor indeed would it be right for  us to  do so,  to enter into the question whether Gurinder Kaur  committed suicide  or was murdered. That is a matter which is properly involved in the trial of a criminal charge by  a court possessing jurisdiction. We are concerned here only with an examination of the question whether, after being  informed   of  Gurinder   Kaur’s  death,  the  police authorities conducted themselves as law and justice required of them.  A counter  affidavit of October, 1981 of Shri P.S. Bhinder, Commissioner  of Police, Delhi states that Gurinder Kaur was  admitted in  the Ram  Manohar  Lohia  Hospital  on August 9,  1980 at 12.15 P.M. with "100% burn injury" by her father-in-law, 115 Shri Kartar Singh Sawhney, and that on receiving information a Sub-Inspector  of Police visited the hospital and was told by the  doctor on  duty at 3. 10 P.M. that Gurinder Kaur was unfit to  make a statement. His enquiries led him to believe that Gurinder  Kaur had  attempted  to  commit  suicide.  He registered the case as F.I.R. No. 507  dated August  9, 1980 under  s.  309  of  the  Indian  Penal  Code  and  commenced investigation. At  8. IS  P.M. On the same day Gurinder Kaur died.  The   police  investigation  brought  to  light  that Gurinder Kaur  was found  burning at about 11 A.M. On August 9, 1980 in the bathroom of the first floor of the house. The police say  that the bath room was found bolted from inside, and it  was  broken  open  by  a  servant,  Ramu,  with  the assistance of Smt. Satinder Kaur, the elder daughter-in-law. After the  fire was  extinguished, Gurinder Kaur was removed to the  hospital. It  is said that a tin can of S litters of Kerosene oil, two match boxes and one looking-glass with the words "Do not hold any one responsible Pinky" written on its surface with  a soap  cake were  found. The Central Forensic Science Laboratory  experts summoned for the purpose were of opinion that  the writing on the mirror was that of Gurinder Kaur. It  was also  said that the door of the bathroom could have been broken open from outside.      When Shri Bhagwant Singh complained about the manner in which the  police investigation was proceeding and expressed his suspicions  in regard  to the circumstances in which his daughter died,  the police  added section  4  of  the  Dowry Prohibition  Act   to  the  charge  on  November  29,  1980. Subsequently, on  May 15,  1981 reference  to s.  306 of the Indian Penal  Code was  also included.  The police continued their investigation  until August  29, 1981,  and  from  the investigation they  inferred that  it was a case of suicide. It seems  that thereafter the investigation was entrusted by the Minister  of State for Home Affairs in the Government of India to  the Central  Bureau of Investigation, and the file was sent  to its  Director on  September 10,  1981. For that reason, it  is said,  no question arose of filing any report under s. 173 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.      Shri Bhagwant  Singh has  vigorously contended that the investigating agency  in this  case did  not carry  out  its statutory duties  in  a  bonafide  manner  and  deliberately withheld the  filing of  a police  report  and  resorted  to delaying the  progress of  the  investigation  in  order  to ensure that no proceedings were taken against the accused in the case.  He disputes  the version  of the  police that the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 12  

doctor 116 on duty  at the  hospital had  said that  Gurinder Kaur  was unfit to  make a  statement and that it was not possible for the police  to obtain her statement before her death. He has referred to  the statement of Shri Kartar Singh Sawhney, the father-in-law of  the girl,  made to  the police on November 13, 1980, in which he had disclosed that Shri Bhagwant Singh had come  to the hospital and he found that his daughter was talking occasionally,  and that  during the period from 2.30 P.M. to  8.30 P.M. Shri Bhagwant Singh, his wife, his niece, who was  a doctor,  and his  elder brother Balwant Singh, as well as  the latter’s wife and two sons, had been talking to the girl. In his  affidavit Shri Bhagwant Singh also alludes to the  statement of  Smt. Satinder  Kaur  recorded  by  the police on  August 9,  1980 where she stated that at the time of the  tragedy she  rushed upstairs  and fainted  and  that when. she  regained consciousness  many people including her father-in-law, mother-in-law  and brother-in-law, Raman Deep Singh who  lived on  the second  floor were  present. It  is pointed out  that if  this statement is true, then it is not possible to  accept the version put forward by the family of Shri  Kartar   Singh  that   the  servant,  Ramu,  with  the assistance of  Smt. Satinder Kaur had to break open the door of the  bathroom because  it was  bolted from  inside. It is also pointed  out that  the servant  Ramu and  Smt. Satinder Kaur were alleged to be on the ground floor when the burning took place  in the both room on the first floor of the house where  the   mother-in-law,  Gurbachan   Kaur  was  present. Gurbachan Kaur,  according to  her  statement,  was  ironing clothes at  that movement  on the  first floor,  a few yards away from  the bathroom and would have been the first person to have  witnessed the  tragedy and  yet, it  is questioned, there is no reason why she should not have been the first to assist the  servant Ramu in breaking open the door if indeed the door  had to be broken open. It is also alleged that the police never  attempted to  take into possession the cake of soap in  the bathroom with which the deceased is supposed to have written  on  the  looking  glass,  nor  did  they  take possession of  the blanket, which according to the statement of Shri Kartar Singh Sawhney, was employed to extinguish the fire. Several  suspicious circumstances  have been set forth by Shri  Bhagwant Singh in his affidavit, and the opinion of the C.F.S.L. experts has been assailed on the ground that it was delivered  on an  examination of  the mirror  after more than a  month. He  has also attempted to rebut the assertion of the police that he did not join in the investigation from the outset  and that  he had originally said that he did not suspect any foul play. On the contrary, he has dwelt at some length on the 117 continuous attempts  made by  him  to  ensure  an  effective investigation  into  the  cause  of  his  daughter’s  death, approaching in  this behalf  the highest  authorities in the land.      When this  case came  before this  Court, an  order was made directing  the filing  of a  detailed affidavit  by the Commissioner of Police setting forth full particulars of the various steps  taken by  the police  in connection  with the investigation. A further counter affidavit was filed by Shri P. S.  Bhinder, Commissioner  of Police. It is stated in the counter affidavit  that the  investigating officer  remained busy with  the investigation of other cases and with matters concerning the  maintenance of  law and order. and that this particular case was with Sub-Inspector Amrit Lal, who had 12

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 12  

cases in  hand, from  August 9, 1980 to August 11, 1980. and thereafter was  entrusted to  Sub-Inspector Sri Ram, who had 29 cases in hand, from August 12, 1980, to November 13,1980, and subsequently  to Inspector  Charan Das, who had only one case in  hand, from November 13, 1980 to May 28, 1981. It is stated that  these police  officers "could  not  investigate this case  all the  time" because besides the other cases in hand, they had also to look after the day-to-day work of the Police Station.  It is said also that during the period when the case  was under investigation with Inspector Charan Das, the file  remained under  submission to  the Crime  Bench of Delhi for  scrutiny with a view to guide the local police on further investigation.  Finally, the  case passed  into  the hands of  Inspector R.  P. Kochhar  of the Crime Branch, who had four cases in hand, and he dealt with this case from May 28, 1981  to September  9, 1981.  It  is  pointed  out  that Inspector Kochhar  was at  that time entrusted also with the investigation of  a number  of cases  involving a  notorious dacoit as  well as two sensational murders. It is reiterated in the counter affidavit that the statement of Gurinder Kaur could not  be recorded  by the  police as the doctor on duty had declared  her unfit  to make a statement. It is admitted that the  blanket with  which the  fire was extinguished was not taken  into possession by the police, but it is asserted that the  soap cake  was taken on August 9, 1980. It is also asserted that  on August,  10, 1980  Sub-Inspector Amrit Lal brought  a   team  of  C.F.S.L.  experts  to  the  place  of occurrence and  a photograph  of the mirror was taken. It is alleged that  although every  effort was  made to record the statement of  Shri Bhagwant  Singh, he  declined to make any statement. It  was only on April 21, 1981 that he did so. It is conceded  that reference  to section  306 of  the  Indian Penal Code was added only on May 15, 1981, the omission 118 to do  so earlier  being explained  as a  mistake. The delay occasioned  A  in  the  investigation  is  ascribed  by  the Commissioner of  Police to the fact that Shri Bhagwant Singh permitted his statement to be recorded only as late as April 21, 1981.      We think  it can  be fairly  stated that the police did not  display   the  promptitude  and  efficiency  which  the investigation of the case required. There is much that calls for comment.  It appears from the entries in the police Case Diary that  a Sub-Inspector  visited the place of occurrence on August 9, 1980 and seized a number of articles. But it is conceded that  he did not take into custody the blanket with which the  fire is  said to  have been  put out. On the next day, experts  from the  Central Forensic  Science Laboratory visited the  place and  appear to.  have made an examination for chance  prints. They  also photographed  the mirror. And yet, it  was not until over five weeks later that the police were able  to obtain a report from them. Curiously, although the minor  was removed  from the scene of occurrence and was examined for  chance prints,  no "identifiable prints" could be developed.  In cases  such as this, it would have been of the  essence  that  on  visiting  the  place  of  occurrence immediately on  information  of  the  incident,  the  mirror should have  been taken  into possession  by the  police and handed  over  forthwith  to  the  Central  Forensic  Science Laboratory experts  for an  urgent report  in regard  to the existence and  identification of the prints. Delay in such a matter is vital and can often result in the loss of valuable clues. It  is of  little consolation  that, according to the entry G.  D. No.  7 dated  September  23,  1980  the  Deputy Commissioner of  Police wrote  a reminder  to the  Director,

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 12  

Central  Forensic   Science   Laboratory   for   an   urgent examination of the writing.      An important question was whether the bathroom door was latched from  inside and  had to  be forced  open, or was in fact latched  from outside.  According to the family of Shri Kartar Singh,  the door was forced open with the help of the servant Ramu.  The entry C. D. No. 1 dated August 9, 1980 in the Case  Diary does  not indicate that Ramu’s statement was recorded by  the police  on that day, although it shows that the statements  of other  persons were  recorded. There is a suggestion by  the learned counsel for the State that Ramu’s statement was  also recorded  on that  very day, but that is not shown  by the Case Diary extracts filed before us. It is only as  late as January 25, 1981, according to the entry C. D. No. 13 of that date, that the servant was examined by the Station House officer. Ramu 119 was a  material witness,  and yet  strangely, as  it appears from the entries in the police Case Diary, he was allowed to leave the  town and  go to  his village  before he  could be fully examined  by the police. There is no evidence that the police expressed  any anxiety  to put him through a thorough examination immediately  or shortly  after the  date of  the occurrence or  at least  before Shri  Kartar Singh’s  family allowed Ramu to leave the town for his village.      Much has  been made  by the police of the reluctance of Shri Bhagwant  Singh to  make a  statement  to  them.  As  a responsible officer  of sufficiently  senior status  in  the Government of  India it  would have  been natural  to expect that he  would have come forward from the very first to have his statement  recorded and  to cooperate  with the  police, especially in  view of  the fact  that he  would  have  been particularly anxious  to have  the truth determined into the death of his own daughter. It is indeed difficult to believe that  he   did  not   cooperate  with   the  police  in  the investigation or  declined to give his statement until April 21, 1981. But if he did so, it could only be because of want of  confidence   in  the   manner  in   which   the   police investigation was being conducted.      The most  vital evidence  would have been the statement of Gurinder  Kaur herself,  and yet even on that point there is a  conflict of  testimony on the question whether she was fit to  make a statement at 3.10 p.m. when the Sub-Inspector approached the  doctor for  the purpose.  On the other hand, according to  the statement  made by her father-in-law, Shri Kartar Singh,  himself to  the police  on November 13, 1980, when her father Shri Bhagwant Singh came to the hospital and entered the room, the girl was talking occasionally, and during the  period 2.30.p.m.  to  8.30  p.m.  Shri  Bhagwant Singh, his  wife, his  niece who  was a.  doctor  and  other members  of  his  family  had  been  talking  to  the  girl. According to  the statement  of Dr. Rajinder Pal Kaur, niece of Shri  Bhagwant Singh,  Gurinder Kaur was in possession of her senses at the time and when Dr. Kaur suggested to one of the police officers, who was present, to record to statement of the  girl, he  declined to  do so. It is regrettable that there is a conflict on the question whether the girl was fit to make a statement to the police, and we are constrained to point out  that the  conflict centres on a vital part of the case.      There are  other features  of the  case, including  the question of  the transfer  of a Television set to the family of Shri  Kartar Singh  as a  palliative by  the uncle of the unfortunate girl, but. we find it 120

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 10 of 12  

unnecessary to  enter into  them. It  is enough to point out that A  the investigation  by the  police does  not  inspire confidence.  It   was,  in   fact,   considered   materially inadequate by  the Crime Branch itself. For on May 12, 1981, a memorandum was addressed by the Crime Branch to the Deputy Commissioner of  Police, Delhi  pointing out  that the  file showed that  statements of  material persons  had  not  been recorded. We  may also  advert to the fact that although the girl was  taken to the hospital in a taxi, the police do not appear to  have attached  any importance  to  recording  the statement of  the taxi driver. There is also an affidavit of one Shri  Jagjit Singh  before us from which it appears that he was  among the first to reach the house when the incident occurred and that it was he who suggested that the girl, who was lying burnt half inside the bathroom and half outside in the verandah, should be taken forthwith to the hospital, and he states that it was he who wag instrumental in sending for the taxi.  Shri Jagjit  Singh was  an important witness, and although he was in the neighbourhood, no attempt was made to record his statement expeditiously.      Two inferences  follow irresistibly  from the  material before us.  One is  that the  investigation  by  the  police following the  occurrence was  desultory and  lackadaisical, and showed  want of appreciation of the emergent need to get at the  truth of  the case.  There is  a powerful suggestion made by  learned counsel  for Shri  Bhagwant Singh  that the police were  anxious not  to embarrass Shri Kartar Singh and his family and may indeed, as it were, have looked the other way  instead   of  vigorously  pursuing  the  investigation. Whatever may  be the  reason, there  is no  doubt  that  the investigation of  the case  suffered from casualness lack of incisiveness and  unreasonable  dilatoriness,  and  this  is demonstrated most  effectively by  the manner  in which  the case was  passed from  one police official to another, being entrusted successively to Sub-Inspectors and Inspectors each of whom already had his hands full with the investigation of several other  cases. There  is  the  admission  that  these police officers  were preoccupied  with numerous other cases in their hands and they were officers who were also required to look  after the day to day work of the police station. It was only  when on  the repeated  and insistent  petitions of Shri Bhagwant  Singh the case passed into the control of the Crime Branch  that the  investigation showed  some signs  of being speeded up.      The other  inference which  disturbs  us  is  that  the entries in  the police Case Diary (set forth in the annexure to the counter affidavit 121 on the  record) do  not appear to have been entered with the scrupulous  completeness   and  efficiency   which  the  law requires of  such a A document. The haphazard maintenance of a document  of that  status not only does no credit to those responsible for  maintaining it but defeats the very purpose for which it is required to be maintained. We think it to be of the  utmost importance  that the entries in a police Case Diary should  be made with promptness, in sufficient detail, mentioning all  significant facts  in careful  chronological order and with complete objectivity.      We believe  it would  be  appropriate  to  make  a  few further observations  at this  stage. It  is  impossible  to escape the  conclusion that,  in a  case such  as this,  the death of  a young  wife must  be attributed  either  to  the commission of a crime or to the fact that, mentally tortured by  the   suffocating  circumstances  surrounding  her,  she committed suicide.  Young women  of education,  intelligence

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 11 of 12  

and character  do not  set fire to themselves to welcome the embrace of  death unless  provoked  and  compelled  to  that desperate step  by the  intolerance of  their misery.  It is pertinent to  note that  such cases  evidence a  deep-seated malady in  our social order. The greed for dowry, and indeed the dowry  system as  an institution, calls for the severest condemnation. It  is evident  that legislative measures such as the  Dowry Prohibition  Act have not met with the success for which they were designed. Perhaps, legislation in itself cannot succeed  in  stamping  out  such  an  evil,  and  the solution must ultimately be found in the conscience and will of the social community and in its active expression through legal and constitutional methods.      Besides this,  what is  important to  point out is that where the  death in  such cases  is  due  to  a  crime,  the perpetrators of  the crime  not infrequently escape from the nemesis  of   the   law   because   of   inadequate   police investigation. It  would be of considerable assistance if an appropriately high  priority was  given to  the  expeditious investigation  of  such  cases,  if  a  special  magisterial machinery  was   created  for  the  purpose  of  the  prompt investigation of such incidents, and efficient investigative techniques and  procedures were  adopted into taking account the  peculiar   features  of   such   cases.   Among   other suggestions, we would recommend that a female police officer of sufficient  rank and status in the police force should be associated with  the investigation  from its very inception. There are evident advantages in that. In a case where a wife dies in suspicious circumstances in her husband’s home it is invariably a matter of 122 considerable   difficulty    to   ascertain    the   precise circumstances  in   which  the  incident  occurred.  As  the incident takes  place  in  the  home  of  the  husband,  the material witnesses  are usually  the husband and his parents or other  relations of the husband staying with him. Whether it was  cooking at  the kitchen  stove which was responsible for the  accident or, according to the inmates of the house, there was  an inexplicable urge to suicide or whether indeed the young  wife was  the victim  of  a  planned  murder  are matters  closely  involving  the  intimate  knowledge  of  a woman’s daily existence.      If the incident is the result of a crime by the husband or his  family, the  problem of  ascertaining the  truth  is burdened by  the privacy  in which the incident occurred. In circumstances where  it is  possible  to  record  the  dying declaration of the victim, it would, in our opinion, be more conducive to  securing the  truth if  the  victim  made  the declaration in  the presence  of a female police officer who can  be  expected  to  inspire  confidence  in  the  victim. Psychological factors play their part, and their role cannot be ignored.  A young  wife can  be the  subject  of  varying psychological pressures,  and because that is so the nuances of feminine  psychology support  the need  for  including  a female police officer as part of the investigating force. While making  these observations  we may  emphasise that  we intend no  aspersion on  the rectitude  or efficiency of the male members  of the police involved in the investigation of such cases.      Another suggestion  which has  found favour  with us is the need  to extend  the application  of the  Coroners’ Act, 1871  to  other  cities  besides  those  where  it  operates already. The  application of  the Coroners’  Act  will  make possible an  immediate inquiry into the death of the victim, whether it has been caused by accident, homicide, suicide or

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 12 of 12  

suddenly by  means unknown. It contains provisions which are entirely salutary  for the  purpose of  such inquiry, and we have little doubt that an inquiry under that enactment would be more meaningful and effective and complete in the kind of case before  us. We  are aware  that the  Code  of  Criminal Procedure, 1973 contains, in sections 174 and 175, provision for a  police inquiry  pursuant to  an  information  that  a person has  committed suicide  or has been killed by another or by  an animal  or by  machinery or  by an accident or has died under  circumstances raising  reasonable suspicion that some other  person has  committed an offence. In such a case the police  officer makes  an investigation  and  submits  a report to  the District  Magistrate  or  the  Sub-Divisional Magistrate, and thereafter the 123 District Magistrate  of Sub-Divisional  Magistrate or  other Executive Magistrate empowered in that behalf is required to hold an  inquest. The police officer making an investigation is entitled to summon two or more persons for the purpose of the investigation  and any  other person  who appears  to be acquainted with  the facts  of the case to attend and answer truly all questions other than questions the answer to which would have  a tendency  to incriminate him. We think that in the category  of cases  we have in mind the more appropriate and effective  procedure would  be that  contemplated by the Coroners’ Act, which ensures that the inquiry into the death is held  by a  person of  independent standing  and enjoying judicial powers, with a status and jurisdiction commensurate with the  necessities of such cases and the assistance of an appropriate machinery.      We have  referred to  some of the important features of the case. We have done so not for the purpose of determining whether the  girl was murdered or had committed suicide, but solely with the object of drawing attention to the manner in which  the   investigation  of   the  case   was  conducted. Disappointing as  it may  seem to those who have desired the institution of criminal action on the basis that a crime has been committed,  we do not think that on the material before us we  can go  that far.  The investigation  of the case was transferred from  the police  administration of Delhi to the Central  Bureau   of  Investigation   at  the  instance,  we understand, of  the petitioner.  We hope and trust that this investigation has  been completed.  It not, we would request the  Central   Bureau  of   Investigation  to  complete  the investigation within  three months  from the  today and take such action  as may  be  warranted  by  the  result  of  the investigation.      The petition is disposed of accordingly. S.R. 124