http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 14  

PETITIONER: MULAK RAJ & ORS.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF HARYANA

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       19/01/1996

BENCH: MAJMUDAR S.B. (J) BENCH: MAJMUDAR S.B. (J) RAY, G.N. (J)

CITATION:  1996 SCC  (7) 308        JT 1996 (1)   401  1996 SCALE  (1)419

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                       J U D G M E N T S.B. Majmudar, J.      This is  an unfortunate  case in  which a  young  bride named Krishna  Kumari lost  her life  on the  altar of dowry demands on  the morning  of 12th April 1977 in the household of present  appellants who  were charged with the offence of murder under  Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (in brief ‘IPC’). The Trial Court acquitted them. The respondent-State’s  appeal against acquittal was allowed by the  High Court  and the  appellants were convicted under Section 302  read with  Section  34  of  the  IPC  and  were sentenced to  undergo imprisonment for life. Appellant Nos.1 and 2  were further  sentenced to  pay a  fine of Rs.3,000/- each and in default, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for two  years each.  Fine, if  realised, was  ordered to be paid to  Wasanda Ram  Taneja, P.W.23, father of the deceased Krishna Kumari  and that  is how  the appellant-accused  are before us  in the statutory appeal invoking Section 2 of the Supreme   Court    (Enlargement   of    Criminal   Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1970.      As the  acquittal of  the appellants is reversed by the High Court  in  appeal  and  they  have  been  sentenced  to imprisonment for  life we  have carefully  gone through  the entire evidence  on record,  both oral and documentary, with the assistance  of learned  counsel appearing  for both  the sides with  a view  to finding  out whether deceased Krishna Kumari died  a homicidal  death or  had  indulged  in  self- effacement by  committing suicide  and whether appellants or any one of them had been quality of murdering her. Prosecution Case      It will  be apposite  to note at the outset the salient features of  the prosecution  case  laid  against  the  four appellants who  will be  referred to  as accused nos.1 to 4, for the  sake of  convenience, in  the latter  part of  this judgment. Accused  No.1 was  the father-in-law  of  deceased

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 14  

Krishna Kumari.  Accused no.2  was her husband. Accused no.3 is the  younger sister of accused no.2 while accused no.4 is the sister-in-law of accused no.1. It is not in dispute that all the  accused were  living together  in  the  same  house situated at  Urban Estate,  Gurgaon in the State of Haryana. The prosecution  story as  emerging from  the record is that marriage of  Krishna Kumari  deceased with  accused no.2 was settled  by  her  father  Wasanda  Ram  Taneja  P.W.23.  The ‘Shaggan’ ceremony was performed two days before the date of marriage. Gopal  Dass, P.W.13 and Joginder Singh, P.W.18 had also accompanied  Wasanda Ram  on that  occasion. When  they reached the  house of  the accused all the four accused were present there.  As soon  as the  articles of  ‘Shaggan’ were placed before  them, they  asked as to what had been brought in  the  ‘Shaggan’.  They  remarked  that  no  refrigerator, television, tape  recorder etc.  had been  brought,  Wasanda Ram, P.W.23  got puzzled  and  requested  the  accused  with folded hands  that he would supply these articles slowly and slowly. All  these  persons  returned  after  the  ‘Shaggan’ ceremony. Krishna  Kumari deceased  then was married to Hira Lal accused  No.2 on  10th February  1977. Wasanda  Ram gave seven Tolas  gold and  other necessary  articles  worth  Rs. 25,000/-. He,  however, could  not provide  refrigerator and television.      After marriage  Krishna Kumari  had been  visiting  the house of  her parents  occasionally. A  month prior  to this occurrence she  happened to  meet Saroj,  P.W.16, her  elder sister while  she was  at Gurgaon.  The deceased  was  in  a depressed mood  at that  time and  on enquiry  by Saroj  she replied with  heavy heart and tears in her eyes that her in- laws were  harassing her as television and refrigerator were not given  in the  dowry. Saroj,  P.W.16 told her that their father would  satisfy the  demand  slowly  and  slowly.  The deceased further  told that  her in-laws  were keen  to  see their demands  fulfilled immediately. She further told Saroj that her  in-laws were  threatening her  that  in  case  the demand was not satisfied early she would be finished.      Krishna Kumari deceased was P.Sc. B.Ed. M.A. in History and M.A.  Previous in English. She was employed as a teacher in a  school at  Farrakhnagar drawing  a salary  of Rs.600/- p.m. On  her journey to Farrakhnagar in a bus Krishna Kumari was seen upset upon which Dr. Onkar Kapoor, P.W.22 talked to her and  she commented  that the system of giving and taking dowry should  be abolished. She wanted to consult Dr. Kapoor otherwise also.      That one  and a  half months after the marriage Krishna Kumari also  happened to  meet Madan Lal, P.W.17 and finding her in  a depressed  mood he  made enquiries  from her  upon which she  told that  the marriage  was a gamble and she had lost the  same. On further enquiry she told that her in-laws were demanding  refrigerator and television, and were greedy persons to  which Madan Lal Kapoor, P.W.17 told the deceased that she was earning more than her husband and what else was needed by  her in-laws.  Thereupon  Krishna  Kumari  started weeping and went away.      Krishna Kumari,  deceased, was  also a private tutor of children of  Saroj Chopra,  P.W.26. Even  after her marriage and on  her visit  to the  house of her parents she had been doing that work. She told her that she was not happy and was in trouble. On enquiry by Saroj Chopra, P.W.26, the deceased told her  that her  in-laws were  troubling her  and she had been tolerating.  Some days  later Smt. Saroj Chopra, P.W.26 had gone  to the  house of Wasanda Ram, P.W.23 where she met Santosh Kumari,  P.W.14 and  told her that if Krishna Kumari comes to their house, she should be sent to her house (Saroj

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 14  

Chopra’s house).  She was informed that Krishna Kumari would be coming on Baisakhi day for dinner.      That a  month prior  to the  occurrence Krishna  Kumari deceased had  come to  the house  of her  parents where  she talked to Santosh Kumari, P.W.14, her sister-in-law that her in-laws were  demanding refrigerator  and television  in the dowry.      At the  end of March, 1977 Krishna Kumari, deceased had gone to  the house  of her  parents when  Mohan Lal  Grover, P.W.15 met  her at  her house  and found  her in a depressed mood and  weak in  Health. On  enquiry the deceased told him that her  in-laws were harassing her by taking up the demand of adequate  dowry. Krishna  Kumari stayed for a weed at the house of her parents before this occurrence and then she had gone to  her in-laws’  house telling that they were going to Vaishno Devi.      The deceased  and her  husband actually went to Vaishno Devi and had returned two days earlier to the occurrence.      Coming to  the date  of incident  it is revealed as per prosecution evidence  that on  the fateful day of 12th April 1977 at  about 11.30  a.m. to  11.45  a.m.  Santosh  Kumari, P.W.14 had gone to the house of Krishna Kumari, deceased, to enquire about  her and  to invite  her for  the meals on the Baisakhi day.  When she  reached Krishna  Kumari’s house she found 2-3 boys present there besides 1 or 2 ladies including accused nos.3  and 4.  On enquiring about the whereabouts of Krishna Kumari,  deceased, accused no.4 told Santosh Kumari, P.W.14 that  she  would  go  inside  and  see  for  herself. Thereupon Santosh  Kumari, P.W.14  went inside  the house of the accused  and found  dead body of Krishna Kumari lying in the kitchen.  Her  tongue  was  protruding  out.  There  was bleeding from  the nose. Santosh Kumari, P.W.14 informed the father of  the deceased,  P.W.23 who  was her father-in-law. She requested  him to  come immediately  to the house of the accused. Her  father-in-law, P.W.23,  immediately rushed  to the spot.  Mother-in-law of  Santosh Kumari also came to the spot. By  that time accused no.1 had also reached there from the factory where he used to go. He had been informed of the incident by  his daughter,  Veena, accused no.3 on phone. It is the  further case  of the  prosecution that  accused no.2 also came  on spot.  That accused no.1 wanted to cremate the dead body  of Krishna  Kumari but  on the objection taken by her father  Wasanda Ram,  P.W.23, accused  no.1 went  to the police station  and lodged  a complaint  alleging  that  the deceased Krishna  Kumari had  committed suicide.  Thereafter Assistant  Sub-Inspector   Amar  Chand,   P.W.25   took   up investigation. He  came to  the spot and prepared an Inquest Report. He  recorded the statements of Santosh Kumari, Vidya Wati, Ram  Asra, Wasanda  Ram and  of accused  no.1, accused no.2 and  Rajesh Kumar,  brother of  accused no.2.  Dr. S.K. Gupta, P.W.1  conducted the  postmortem on  the dead body of Krishna Kumari  on 13th  April 1977  at 9.00  a.m. We  shall refer to  the result  of the postmortem examination a little later. Suffice  it to say at this stage that on the basis of the said  post mortem  report the police registered criminal case against  all the  accused under  Section 302  read with Section 34 of the IPC as it was felt that Krishna Kumari had not committed  suicide  but  had  died  a  homicidal  death. Thereafter it  appears that  the proceedings  lingered on at investigation stage  but  the  accused  were  not  arrested. Ultimately the  father of the deceased, P.W.23 af ter making various attempts  for attracting the attention of the higher authorities including  the Prime Minister, Chief Minister of Haryana and  others, lodged  a private  complaint before the learned  Magistrate   in  August  1977.  Thereafter  further

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 14  

statements of witnesses were recorded. We will refer to them at an  appropriate place  hereafter. Ultimately  the accused were  arrested   in  February   1978  and  after  completing investigation chargesheet  was submitted against the accused for offences under Section 302 read with Section 34, IPC and after usual  committal  proceedings  the  case  reached  the Sessions  Court  being  Sessions  Case  No.26  of  1978  and Sessions Trial  No.39 of  1978. The  offences with which the accused were  charged  were  under  Section  302  read  with Section 34. IPC and also under Section 201 read with Section 34, IPC. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurgaon, who tried the  accused, after  recording evidence offered by the prosecution  as   well  as  by  the  defence,  came  to  the conclusion that  the prosecution  was not  able to establish beyond reasonable  doubt that  deceased Krishna  Kumari  had died a  homicidal death and that prosecution had also failed to establish  that the accused were guilty of murdering her. Consequently they  were acquitted of the offences with which they were  charged. As noted earlier it is this acquittal by the Trial Court that has been reversed by the Division Bench of the  High Court  of Punjab  & Haryana  at  Chandigarh  in Criminal Appeal  No.1451 of  1979, moved  by  the  State  of Haryana against the present appellants and that has resulted in the present proceedings. Rival contentions      Shri  Lalit,  learned  senior  counsel  for  appellant- accused has  vehemently contended  that this  is a  case  in which the  prosecution has failed to bring home the offences with which  the appellants  were charged.  That there  is no clear evidence  of motive  against the  appellants. That the prosecution tried to prove the motive by leading evidence of various witnesses  but their version stood contradicted with their police  statements and  were not worthy of acceptance. That the  married life of deceased Krishna Kumari was a very short one  being of  only two months and seven days and that there was  no evidence  on  record  that  during  that  time deceased was  in any  way harassed or physically tortured by the accused  or  any  one  of  them.  That  the  demand  for refrigerator or television as alleged by the prosecution was also not  clearly established on record. On the contrary the evidence showed  that Krishna  Kumari and  accused no.2, her husband had  gone on a pilgrimage of ‘Vaishno Devi’ only two days before  the date  of incident  and even  on the date of incident Krishna  Kumari had  served  breakfast  to  accused no.2, her  husband who  thereafter had  gone to  attend  his duties as  stenographer in  the Agricultural Office at Delhi while accused  no.1,  her  father-in-law  had  gone  to  his factory at  Gurgaon which  he reached before 8.00 a.m., that being the  time at  which the  factory started working. That there was  nothing to  show as  to at  what time exactly the deceased died  and accused  or any one of them were involved in her death. That the dead body was found in the kitchen in a burnt  condition and  the door  of the  kitchen was closed from inside. That these circumstances clearly ruled out case of murder but would remain a case of suicide. It was further contended that the so-called extra judicial confessions said to have  been made by accused nos.1 and 2 before P.Ws.10 and 13 could not be relied upon and were rightly rejected by the Trial Court.  That the  High Court had believed these extra- judicial confessions  without  considering  the  infirmities with  which   the  evidence   about   these   extra-judicial confession without  considering the  infirmities with  which the evidence  about these  extra-judicial  confessions  were ruled out  there remained nothing in the prosecution case to bring home the offences to the accused. That this was a case

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 14  

of circumstantial  evidence which  suffered from  absence of complete links  and the  entire chain  of circumstances  for linking the  accused with  the crime  was not established by the  prosecution.   It  was   further  contended   that  the appellant-accused nos.1  and 2  could establish  by  leading cogent evidence  in defence  that they  were not  present on spot when  the incident occurred. That accused no.2 had gone to the  office of  Agricultural Department  where he  served under the  Marketing Officer and his duty hours started from 10.00 a.m.  onwards while  accused  no.1  had  gone  to  his factory before  8.00 a.m.  and was  actually in  the factory from 8.00  a.m. onwards.  That the  prosecution has  equally failed to  establish by  cogent evidence  the involvement of accused nos.3  and  4  in  the  incident  in  question.  He, therefore, contended  that this  was a  case of  suicide for which the accused cannot be held responsible and in any case there is  no charge  against them  under Section  306 of the IPC. That  if the  main charge  under Section  302 read with Section 34,  IPC failed  nothing survived  for bringing home charge under Section 201, IPC to the accused. It was further contended that  the reasons  which weighed  with  the  Trial Court for acquitting the accused represented a possible view and could not be treated to be an impossible or unreasonable view and  hence in  appeal against  acquittal the High Court ought not to have interfered.      Learned counsel  for respondent-State on the other hand tried to  support the  judgment and  order of the High Court convicting the appellants and sentencing them as aforesaid.      In the  light of  the aforesaid  rival contentions  the following points arise for our determination: (i) Whether  deceased Krishna  Kumari died a homicidal death      on the  morning of  12th April  1977 or whether she had      committed suicide. (ii) If  it is  held that  deceased Krishna  Kumari  died  a      homicidal death  whether accused or any one of them can      be held quality of offences under Section 302 read with      Section 34, IPC for murdering deceased Krishna Kumari.      We shall deal with these points seriatim : Point No.(i)      So far  as the nature of the death of Krishna Kumari is concerned it  has to  be appreciated that P.W.6 Balbir Singh has stated  that on  12th April  1977 he  was sitting in the ‘verandah’ of his business premises at about 10.30 a.m.. His premises are situated in the vicinity of the house where the tragic event  of death  of Krishna  Kumari took  place.  The witness stated  that he heard the cries of accused no.4 that there was  fire. Hearing  these cries  he and his worker Ram Asra came  to the house of accused no.1. On enquiry from Raj Rani, accused  no.4, he  was told  that the  fire was in the kitchen. He  tried to break open the door of the kitchen but it was bolted from inside. When the door could not be opened he asked  Ram Asra  to bring  ‘Saddal’ (a small hammer) from the factory.  Consequently he  brought the ‘saddal’ and with the help  of the same the door of the kitchen was opened. On opening the  door he  found the  dead body  lying there duly burnt inside  the kitchen. He felt the pulse of the body and it was  not  functioning.  The  aforesaid  evidence  of  the witness shows  that the  dead body  of the  deceased Krishna Kumari was lying inside the kitchen in a burnt condition and the door  of the  kitchen was bolted from inside. It is this evidence which  prompted the  learned Trial Judge to come to the conclusion  that this  is  not  a  case  of  murder  but probably of  suicide. Though  in the  light of  the  medical evidence the  learned Trial  Judge himself entertained doubt and had  to conclude  that the  death  of  deceased  Krishna

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 14  

Kumari is  shrouded in mystery. The high Court, on the other hand on  considering  medical  evidence  and  other  related evidence to  which we  will presently  refer, took  the view that  deceased  Krishna  Kumari  would  not  have  committed suicide but  had suffered a homicidal death, we are inclined to agree with the said finding of the High Court for obvious reasons which are well established on record.      It must  firstly be  kept in view that deceased Krishna Kumari was having normal health and was a working woman. She was highly  qualified and  was serving  as a  teacher  in  a school. She  was earning  Rs.600/- per  month which was more than what  her husband  accused no.2 was earning. If she was out to  commit suicide  it would  be natural  that she would leave any  Suicide Note. No such note was found at the place of the  incident. Secondly,  if she had committed suicide by setting herself  on fire  then at  least some  cry or  sound would have escaped from her mouth. No such evidence is found in the  case. Her  mouth was  not found gagged or closed. On the contrary  tongue was found protruding out when dead body was detected  on spot.  It is true that the kitchen door was found bolted  from inside as witness Balbir Singh, P.W.6 has stated and the door had to be broken open. There is evidence on record  to show  that there  was a service window about 3 ft. from  the ground  floor level  which was  open and  from which at  least with  difficulty any  one inside  could come out. The  evidence of  photographer, P.W.3 Surinder Singh as well as  the evidence  of investigating officers Amar Chand, P.W.25 and  Om Parkash,  P.W.27 clearly bring out this fact. There are  photographs, P.7  and P.9  to  P.14  produced  by police photographer, P.W.3 Surinder Singh which clearly show that the  kitchen which  was the  scene of incident could be approached or  an exit  from there  could be effected by any one from  the service  window  though  may  be  with  little difficulty. Consequently  the reasoning  of the  High  Court that even  though the  kitchen was found bolted from inside, and the  dead body  could be  found after  breaking open the door of  the kitchen,  if any one had committed the crime of liquidating Krishna  Kumari then after putting her dead body in the kitchen the concerned person could escape through the service window  even after  bolting the  door of the kitchen from inside,  cannot be  faulted. The bolting of the door of the kitchen  from inside  was not  a clinching  circumstance which could  rule out  homicidal death  of deceased  Krishna Kumari. At this stage it is necessary to note that according to the  prosecution case deceased Krishna Kumari was done to death by earlier gagging her nose and mouth and she had died because of  suffocation and  thereafter it was her dead body which was  planted in  the kitchen and was subjected to post mortem burning.  So far  as this  part of  the case  of  the prosecution is  concerned it gets fully supported by medical evidence on  which strong  reliance is  placed by  the  High Court. The  said evidence  consists of the post mortem notes Ex. P.8  proved by  P.W.1 Dr. S.K. Gupta. The witness stated that on 13th April 1977 at about 9.00 a.m. he performed post mortem examination  on the dead body of Smt. Krishna Kumari, wife of  Hira Lal  (accused no.2),  aged about 25 years. The observation of  the witness in connection with the dead body was as follows :           "The length of the body was 5’2". A      blackened body  of medium built. A young      woman wearing  a  charred  Kutcha  Rigor      Mortis was  present. There  was bleeding      through both  the nostrils. Tongue found      protruded 1/3"  outside the  lips. Outer      angles of  the eyes  were congested  and

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 14  

    red. No mark of ligature could be found.      Dissection did  not show any redness and      congestion under  the skin  of the neck.      Thyroid bone  was in tact. The following      were found on the body -      (1)  The body  showed extensive burns of      mostly second  degree and  third  degree      (At the  groins) from  the head  to  the      lower one  third of  the legs, excepting      the fast.      (2)  The body  showed incomplete  peeled      of dried and burnt epidermis all over.      (3)  There were no blisters present.      (4)  No red  line was  found around  the      margins of the burnt areas.      (5)  The floors  of the burnt areas were      of glistening white appearance.      (6)  There were  no signs  of congestion      any where.      (7)  Separating   epidermis    did   not      contain  any  serum.  There  was  a  dry      appearance of the burnt areas all over.      (8)  There were no signs of information.           Right and  left lungs  were  highly      congested and  haemorrhagic  at  several      areas." In the  opinion of  the doctor death was probably because of asphyxia and  the clear  signs of  the burnt  area  strongly suggested that  burns were  post mortem  in  nature.  It  is pertinent to  note  that  in  the  light  of  the  aforesaid observations of  the doctor  as recorded  in the post mortem notes the police registered case under Section 302 read with Section 34 against the appellants on 13th April 1977 itself. Still, curiously enough none of the accused was arrested and the police  appeared to have adopted a lukewarm attitude. In the  meantime  the  investigating  agency  appears  to  have solicited the  opinion of  the  another  doctor,  P.W.2  Dr. Agrawal. Senior  Superintendent of  Police sent  a letter on 19th July  1977 to  the witness  to give  his opinion on the post mortem  report of  Dr. Gupta.  According to Dr. Agrawal the person  may die  due  to  suffocation  as  a  result  of inhalation of  fumes and a smoke in the respiratory passages produced by  burning of  cloths. He  further opined that the line of  redness  in  burns  caused  during  life  may  take sometime to  appear and  therefore it  is possible  that the line of  redness may  be absent  if the  death is immediate. There is  medical evidence  of third doctor, P.W.7 Dr. Radha Mohan. Witness  was Chief Medical Officer, Lucknow and Chief Medico Legal Expert to the State of U.P. He was Professor of Forensic  Medicines  in  medical  colleges  at  Lucknow  and Meerut. He  had seen  the post  mortem examination report of the dead  body of  Smt Krishna  Kumari. The  witness clearly stated that  in his  opinion Krishna  Kumari died before and was burnt  later and the death was due to asphyxia which was a result  of suffocation.  His further  opinion was that the burns found  on the dead body were post mortem. They did not show any  signs of  body reaction which invariably occurs if death was  due to  burns. In  this case  the  characteristic attitude of  the body  known as  the pugilistic attitude was not present. In deaths due to burns this sort of attitude is found. This  confirmed that  the body  was burnt after death had occurred. There were no red lines and no blisters. There was no sign of congestion in the skin. The lungs showed deep congestion but  the wind  pipe did  not show the presence of any soot  or carbon  particles. In  cases of death resulting

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 14  

from burns soot particles are found in the wind pipe because they go in with the breathing. Bleeding from nostrils showed that the  death had  occurred from  asphyxia  which  was  of forceful nature,  i.e., the  patient must have tried hard to breath.  The  protruding  of  the  tongue  showed  that  the deceased tried to breath hard or if something was introduced into the mouth or the mouth was closed and the patient might have tried  to breath  hard to overcome the obstruction, the tongue may  have come  out. Or  if something  was introduced into the  mouth and if that thing was taken out after death, the tongue  will come out. If an alive person is burnt there is bound  to be  blister formation.  But there  will  be  no blister at  all if  the dead  body is burnt, because blister formation is  sign of  life. Nothing  substantial  could  be brought out  in his  cross  examination.  In  view  of  this evidence it  becomes clear  that deceased Krishna Kumari had died a  homicidal death  and the burnt injuries found on her dead body  were post  mortem and  not ante mortem. The doubt expressed by  learned Trial  Judge about the nature of death and which,  according to  learned Trial Judge, was a mystery did not  really  remain  a  mystery  in  the  light  of  the aforesaid clinching  medical evidence. Consequently we agree with the  finding of  the High  Court that  deceased Krishna Kumari died a homicidal death on the fateful morning of 12th April 1977  in the household of the accused. We answer Point No.(i) accordingly.  That takes  us to  the consideration of the moot  question as  to whether  the accused or any one of them had played part in liquidating deceased Krishna Kumari. Point No.(ii)      For bringing  home the  offence under  Section 302 read with Section  34, IPC  to the  accused the  prosecution  has relied upon the following aspects of the prosecution case : (a) Motive; (b) Extra-judicial confessions of accused nos.1 and 2; (c) Subsequent conduct of the accused; and (d) Situation of the scene of offence. (a) Motive      We shall  first  deal  with  the  prosecution  evidence regarding motive. The case of the prosecution as revealed by the evidence  of P.W.23,  father  of  the  deceased  Krishna Kumari, is to the effect that at the time of her marriage he gave seven  Toles of gold and other necessary articles worth Rs.25,000/-  but  he  could  not  provide  refrigerator  and television, tape  recorder etc.  and that  the accused  were dissatisfied with  the  dowry.  That  at  the  time  of  the betrothal ceremony  the accused  were not  satisfied as  the father of  the  deceased  had  given  only  Rs.101/-.  After marriage Krishna  Kumari used  to visit  the  house  of  her parents  occasionally.   This  part   of  the   evidence  is corroborated by  the evidence of witness Saroj P.W.16, elder sister of  the deceased  and  the  evidence  of  independent witnesses Dr.  Onkar Kapoor,  P.W.22, Madan  Lal, P.W.17 and Saroj Chopra,  P.W.26 to  which we have made reference while narrating the  prosecution case.  Similar is the evidence of witness Santosh  Kumari, P.W.14 who stated that deceased had complained about the conduct of the accused a month prior to the occurrence.  In our  view the  High  Court  has  rightly relied  upon   the  aforesaid   evidence  for  reaching  the conclusion that  the accused  nos.1 and  2 were dissatisfied with the  dowry amount  given by  Krishna Kumari’s father at the time  of her  marriage with  accused no.2  and that they were demanding  refrigerator and television etc. The learned Trial Judge on the other hand disbelieved these witnesses on the spacious  plea that  in their police statements they had not given  details about  the complaint  of deceased Krishna

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 14  

Kumari to which they referred in their evidence before court and to that extent their version stood contradicted by their police statements. In this connection it is to be noted that once it is observed agreeing with the High Court that police investigation in  the present  case was  unfortunately  most unsatisfactory  and   cursory,   that   aspect   loses   its significance. It has to be kept in view that on the next day of the  incident, that is, 13th April 1977 on receipt of the post mortem  notes of  Dr. S.K. Gupta the police authorities had themselves  registered the  case under  Section 302 read with Section 34, IPC against the accused, still, the accused were not  arrested. Not  only that  but the police adopted a lukewarm attitude and developed cold feet. Months rolled by. Despite there  being clear opinion of the doctor as found in post mortem  notes, instead  of arresting  the  accused  the investigating agency  tried to  obtain  opinion  of  another doctor, Dr. Agrawal, and that too was done after about three months, i.e.,  on 19th  July 1977. Even despite that opinion which was  in a  way non-committal  no attempt  was made  to tighten the  investigation and  it dragged its feet. That in the meanwhile  exasperated father  of the  deceased, P.W.23, moved from  pillar to  post. As  noted earlier, his evidence reveals that because the police had taken no steps to arrest the accused  the witness  sent telegrams  to Prime Minister, Home Minister and Chief Minister of Haryana, requesting that a fair  investigation be  got done. One S.P. from Chandigarh had also  come for enquiry. In the meantime one Mr. Atre had joined as S.S.P., Gurgaon who had also received a copy of Mr Taneja’s complaint  from the  higher authorities.  He called him and  listened to  him and  then a  further investigation started in the matter. According to the witness, earlier the police was  not doing proper investigation because they were bribed by  the accused. He got the news published in various newspapers and  when the  police did  not take any action in the  matter  he  filed  complaint  before  the  Addl.  Chief Judicial Magistrate.  He attached  the cuttings appearing in the newspapers  with the  complaint. The  court then  issued process  against   the  accused   and   thereafter   further investigation started.  The  aforesaid  evidence  which  has stood the  test of cross-examination really reveals that the police for  reasons best known to them after registering the offence under  Section 302 read with Section 34, IPC against the  accused  as  early  as  13th  April  1977  allowed  the investigation to  drag on in a cursory manner without taking any serious  interest in the investigation. Consequently the statements of witnesses recorded by the police at this stage could not  be treated  to have  represented a  faithful  and complete version recorded by the investigating agency so far as these  witnesses are concerned. The Trial Court obviously erred in  placing implicit  faith in the omissions in police statements and  in discrediting the version of the witnesses before the  court in  connection with  the  motive  evidence deposed to  by them. It was unfortunate that when offence of such a heinous nature which the medical evidence prima facie made out was found to be committal and on the basis of which case under  Section  302  read  with  Section  34,  IPC  was registered against  the accused, the police took to steps to find out as to how this homicide took place in the household of the  accused on  that fateful morning. No effort was made to find  out as  to where the accused no.2 and deceased, his wife, had spent the earlier night? What was the situation of the bed  room? How  far it  was from  kitchen where the dead body was  found in  a burnt  condition having  suffered from post mortem  burns, as  seen from the post mortem report? It appears that  for reasons  best known  to the  investigating

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 10 of 14  

agency at  that time  all relevant evidence which could have been gathered  with promptness  and efficiency in connection with such a heinous crime, was allowed to escape and as will be seen  a little  later, the  result is  that such  a crime committed in  the household  of the  accused wherein a young lady had  lost her  life has  to go  unpunished. Under these circumstances we  entirely concur with the reasoning adopted by the High Court that the evidence regarding motive as laid by the  prosecution through the aforesaid witnesses is quite reliable and  has to  be accepted. It has to be kept in view that accused  no.1 was  serving as  a Foreman  getting about Rs.1200/-  p.m.   while  accused   no.2  was  serving  as  a stenographer earning  Rs.600/-  p.m.  As  compared  to  that deceased was  a highly  educated lady  having Post  Graduate degree in  English and  she was serving as a teacher earning more than  what her  husband earned. Witness, P.W.23, father of the  deceased girl was comparatively in a better economic condition as he was having his own tailoring shop wherein he was employing  assistants.  It  is,  therefore,  just  quite reasonable to presume that the accused no.1 and 2 would have demanded refrigerator  and television  as deposed  to by the aforesaid witnesses finding the father of the deceased to be in a  better economic position. The finding of learned Trial Judge  to   the  contrary  is  totally  lopsided  and  quite unreasonable and  the view  taken by the learned Trial Judge on this  aspect must be treated to be an impossible one. The High Court in appeal against acquittal was, therefore, quite justified in holding that the prosecution has established by satisfactory evidence  that there  was a strong move for the accused to  threaten the  deceased  and  to  pester  her  by demanding dowry  articles, Having  not received refrigerator and television from her father. (b) Evidence regarding extra-judicial confessions      That takes  us to  the consideration  of  the  evidence regarding extra-judicial  confessions of accused no.1 and 2. We may  at once  state that  coupled with  the  evidence  of motive, if  the evidence  of extra-judicial  confessions  of accused nos.1  and 2  stood the  test of scrutiny then there would have  been cast iron case against accused nos.1 and 2. However, unfortunately for the prosecution, on this score it has drawn  blank. It  is the case of the prosecution that in the months  of November,  December 1977 accused nos. 1 and 2 app roached  P.W.10 Hari  Kishan who was a member of the Ad- hoc Committee of the Janata party and P.W.13, Gopal Dass who was an employee of the father of deceased Krishna Kumari and stated before  them that they had committed mistake and that they had  killed the  girl in  anger and they should get the matter amicably  settled.  that  again  after  15  days  the accused met the witness Hari Kishan and stated that the girl cannot come  back and  that they are prepared to compensate. The evidence  of this witness was disbelieved by the learned Trial Judge  as in the court itself the witness was not in a position to  point out  accused  no.2  and  he  pointed  out instead one  Vinod Kumar,  who was  alleged to have made the confession before  him. Even that apart the statement of the witness that he had informed Shri Taneja, that is, father of deceased  Krishna  Kumari  about  this  confession,  is  not corroborated by the evidence of P.W.23, Shri Taneja himself. The witness  also did not inform any one about the so-called confessional  statements   of  the   accused.  His   further statement was recorded by the police on 20th January 1978 in connection with  this alleged  extra-judicial confession  of the accused.  If there  was any  such confession made by the accused before  him in  November or  December  there  is  no reason why he should not have gone to the police immediately

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 11 of 14  

and reported  about  the  same  when  investigation  was  in progress and  even a  criminal complaint  was filed  by  the father of the deceased in the Magistrate’s court and summons were issued  to the  accused. Consequently no reliance could be placed  on the  extra-judicial confessions  said to  have been made  by the  accused before  him. The witness was also not known  to any  of the  parties and hence it was unlikely that accused  would confide  in him  and confess their guilt before  him.   The  learned   trial  Judge  was,  therefore, justified  in   not  placing   reliance  on   extra-judicial confessions of  accused nos.1  and 2, said to have been made before this witness.      So far  as the  extra-judicial confessions said to have been made  by the accused during the same period of November and December  1977 before  witness  Gopal  Dass,  P.W.13  is concerned it is still on a weaker footing. Gopal Dass was an employee of  Krishna Kumari’s father Wasanda ram, P.W.23. If the accused  had told him as alleged by him confessing their crime of  having killed  Krishna Kumari in anger the witness in the  normal course  of conduct  would have  rushed to his employer Krishna  Kumari’s father  and told  him  about  the same. But  curiously enough he informed no one about the so- called extra-judicial  confessions and  only on 20th January 1978 his  further  statement  was  recorded  by  the  police wherein he  stated about this so-called confession about the death of  Krishna Kumari.  Witness Gopal  Dass,  P.W.13  was present on  the scene  of offence after the incident and his statement was  earlier recorded  by the  police.  Under  the circumstances  nothing   prevented  him   from   immediately approaching the  investigating agency  in  November/December 1977 and in informing them about the so-called confession of the  accused.   Still  he  kept  mum  and  did  not  do  so. Consequently the  version  of  this  witness  regarding  the extra-judicial confessions  was rightly  not believed by the learned Trial  Judge. So far as the High Court is concerned, in a  very cursory manner the reasoning of the learned Trial Judge was  brushed aside  by the High Court and reliance was placed  on   these  extra-judicial   confessions.   We   may profitably extract  what the  High Court  had to say in this connection :      "P.W.10 Hari  Kishan  and  P.W.13  Gopal      Dass are the witnesses of extra-judicial      confession made  by Mulakh  raj and Hira      Lal respondents.  Hari Kishan  P.W. is a      resident of  the same  locality and is a      retired Military  Officer. He  is also a      member of  the Ad-hoc Committee of Janta      party.  He   is  not   inimical  to  the      respondents. As  it was  the Janta Party      regime  in  those  days,  it  was  quite      natural  for   the  two  respondents  to      approach him. These respondents admitted      their guilt  before him  and sought  his      intervention.   Similarly,    there   is      nothing against Gopal Dass, P.W. to whom      these respondents  approached  with  the      same request.  He is  a person,  who  is      known to  both the  respondents and  the      complainant. These prosecution witnesses      are also  consistent in their statements      recorded by  the Magistrate.  The  trial      court fell  in error in not relying upon      their  testimony   and   the   reasoning      adopted by it is not convincing." It is  difficult to  appreciate this  reasoning of  the High

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 12 of 14  

Court for placing reliance on the extra-judicial confessions as deposed  to by  these witnesses.  None of the infirmities noted  in   the  evidence   of  these  witnesses  have  been considered by  the High  Court. Shri  Lalit, learned  senior counsel  for   the  appellants   was,  therefore,  right  in contending that evidence of extra-judicial confessions apart from being  inherently weak  is not  at all  established  on record of  this case  and no  reliance can be placed on this evidence. Once that conclusion is reached the most important connecting link  between the  accused or  at  least  accused nos.1 and  2 on  the one  hand and  the homicidal  death  of deceased Krishna  Kumari  on  the  other  gets  snapped  and eliminated. (c) Subsequent conduct of the accused      So far  as the  subsequent conduct  of the  accused  is concerned strong  reliance was placed by learned counsel for the respondent  relying upon  the observation  of  the  High Court  in   this  connection   that  the   accused  did  not immediately inform  the  father  of  the  deceased  who  was staying in  the near  vicinity after  the alleged suicide of his daughter.  That none  of the  accused was  found  to  be lamenting or  weeping when  being apprised  of the incident. That  the  accused  wanted  to  remove  the  dead  body  for cremation but  only on  the insistence  of witness,  Wasanda Ram, P.W.23,  father of the deceased they were not permitted to do  so. In  our view the aforesaid conduct of the accused had not  revealed any  clinching circumstance to necessarily connect the  accused with  the crime.  It has  to be kept in view that so far as accused nos. 1 and 2 were concerned they have led defence evidence to show that accused no.1 had gone to his  factory on the date of the incident before 8.00 a.m. as the  working of  the factory  started at  8.00 a.m.,  and accused no.2  had gone  from Gurgaon  to Delhi to attend his office which  started working  at 10.00 a.m. The evidence of Dr. Gupta  shows that  when he  performed  the  post  mortem examination on  13th April  1977  at  about  9.00  a.m.  the physical condition  of the  dead body  was such  that  death could be  taken to  have occurred  22 hours  before the post mortem examination. That would bring the approximate time of death of  the deceased  to 11.00  a.m. on  12th April  1977. However, leaving  a margin of an hour or two in the light of evidence of  P.W.6 Balbir  Singh who  heard  the  cries  and commotion at  about 10.30  a.m. it  could be said that death might have  occurred within  an hour  prior to  10.30  a.m., namely, between 9.30 a.m. to 10.00 a.m However, this is also a guess  work as  there is  no clear  evidence  led  by  the prosecution to  show as  to what was the exact time of death of the  deceased, even  though as we have found earlier, she died a  homicidal death  in the  household of the accused on the  fateful   morning  of  12th  April  1977.  Under  these circumstances it  is possible to visualize that when accused nos.1 and  2 came  back from their respective places of work after being  informed in  the afternoon  of 12th  April 1977 about the  death of  the deceased  there was no occasion for them to  inform the  father of  the deceased  P.W.23 at  any prior time  as by the time they reached the scene of offence P.W.23 had  already been informed by witness Santosh Kumari, P.W.14 and had reached the spot. So far as accused nos.2 and 4 were  concerned both of them were ladies. Accused no.3 was a girl  aged about  sixteen and  a half  years while accused no.4 was  an elderly  lady and  both of  them might not have thought it  fit to  inform father  of the deceased about the tragedy till  the elder males were informed, namely, accused nos. 1  and 2.  Consequently this conduct on the part of the accused nos.3  and 4  also cannot clinchingly show that they

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 13 of 14  

were co-conspirators  who had shared a common intention with accused nos.1  and 2 to liquidate deceased Krishna Kumari or that they  were the principal accused. Similarly whether the accused lamented  or not  is also an equivocal circumstance. On the  other hand  if it  is  held  that  the  accused  had deliberately planted  the dead body of Krishna Kumari in the kitchen after she was already killed, then to make a show of innocence they  would have easily resorted to mock lamenting and  weeping.   Therefore,  this  circumstance  is  also  an equivocal circumstance  which dows  not necessarily  lead to the culpability  of the accused in the crime. The insistence of accused  nos.1 and  2 to  cremate the body also cannot by itself be  a circumstance  which would  necessarily lead  to their culpability  as accused  no.1  had  already  lodged  a complaint  before  the  police  about  the  suicide  of  his daughter-in-law.  Consequently   the  aforesaid   subsequent conduct on which strong reliance has been placed by the High Court to bring home the offence to the accused cannot really assist the  prosecution and  it does  not represent a strong and clinching  link in  the chain of circumstantial evidence which is  incompatible with  any other  hypothesis save  and except the quilt of the accused. (d) Situation of the scene of offence      That takes  us to the last circumstance on which strong reliance was  placed by  the High  Court for  convicting the appellants. That  pertains to  the scene  of offence.  It is true that  the scene  of offence  was shown to be kitchen in the household of the accused where all the four accused were staying. It is also true that at the time when the dead body of deceased  was found  lying in the kitchen witness Santosh Kumari, P.W.14  found that  the kitchen was in perfect order and there  was no smoke in the kitchen. Kitchen was neat and clean and there was no smell emanating from the kitchen. But even if  that is  so, it is difficult to appreciate how this circumstance by  itself  points  a  quality  finger  to  the accused or  any one of them. Merely because deceased Krishna Kumari who was staying with the accused had died a homicidal death in  their household and her dead body was found in the kitchen with  post mortem  burns it  cannot be said that the said circumstance by itself would connect all the accused or any one of them with the crime.      The  question  still  remains  as  to  who  killed  the deceased Krishna Kumari, whether it was accused no.1 or 2 or 3 or  4 or  whether all  of them  jointly had  taken part in killing her  by suffocating her. Further question remains as to who  was the  principal accused  quality of offence under Section 302  out of the four accused and who were quality of offence under  Section 302  read with  Section 34 for having shared the  common intention  to murder her. It is difficult to appreciate how accused no.3 a minor girl aged sixteen and a half  years being sister-in-law of the deceased had shared such common  intention if  at all  there was  any. All these questions remain  unanswered on  the unsatisfactory state of evidence led  by the  prosecution. As  we have noted earlier the basic  flaw in the case lies in the lukewarm and cursory investigation initiated  by the police after registering the offence under  Section 302 read with Section 34, IPC against these accused.  Result was that prosecution case became lame from the  very beginning  and, therefore, it must be visited with the  logical consequence  of failure  to bring home the offence of  murder to the accused who may at the most remain under the  cloud of  a strong suspicion of having liquidated Krishna Kumari  in their  household on that fateful morning. However strong  the suspicion  may, it cannot take the place of proof.  The High  Court seems to have been swayed away by

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 14 of 14  

the unfortunate and untimely homicidal death of a young girl in the  household of  her father-in-law  and husband  on the altar of  dowry demand.  However, it  is impossible  on  the state of  evidence on record to bring home the offence under Section 302  read with  Section  34  beyond  the  shadow  of reasonable doubt  to any of the accused. The High Court with respect seems  to have  almost rendered  a amoral conviction against the accused rather than a legal one.      In view  of the  aforesaid discussion  point no.(ii) in answered in the negative.      In the  result the  appeal succeeds and is allowed. All the appellant-accused  are acquitted  of the  offence  under Section 302  read with  Section 34, IPC with which they were charged. Similarly  they are  entitled to  be  acquitted  of offence under  Section 201 read with Section 34, IPC as they are not  held to be criminally involved in the incident. All the accused  are given  benefit of  doubt. The  judgment and order of  the High  Court are  set aside  and the  order  of acquittal as  rendered by  the Trial  Court is restored. The accused were  on bail  pending this  appeal. Now there is no occasion for them to surrender. Their bail bonds are ordered to be cancelled and sureties shall stand discharged.