Difficult To Believe Deceased Woman Poured 9L Kerosene, Suffered 100% Burns Without Family Noticing: SC Upholds Life Sentence For Husband & Mother-In-Law
|The Supreme Court upheld the life sentence imposed on the husband and the mother-in-law for the murder of the wife after observing that it’s difficult to believe that the deceased poured almost 9 litres of kerosene on herself, suffered 100% burns, without the family getting a whisper about the same despite being present in the same house.
The Court dismissed the appeals filed by the husband and his mother (Appellants) upholding their conviction under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC for the murder of the wife. The Bench upheld the decisions of the Trial Court and the Uttarakhand High Court, which had found the Appellants guilty based on circumstantial evidence.
The Bench of Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma observed, “It is equally difficult to believe that the deceased poured almost 9 litres of kerosene on herself, put herself on fire and kept on burning till her body suffered 100% burns, without the appellants getting a whisper about the same despite being present in the same house. If it was indeed a case of self-immolation, the appellants must have done something to save her and her body would not have suffered 100% burns. This fact assumes greater gravity when it is seen that the room was not bolted from inside and was open for access.”
Advocate Sachin Patil represented the Appellants, while AOR Sudarshan Singh Rawat appeared for the Respondent.
The deceased was found dead due to 100% burn injuries at her matrimonial home. The FIR, lodged by her brother alleged that the deceased’s in-laws murdered her after subjecting her to harassment and cruelty. The Trial Court convicted the Appellants sentencing them to life imprisonment. The High Court upheld the convictions, prompting the appellants to file the present appeal.
Even though the Appellants submitted that the death of the deceased was suicidal and not homicidal, the Supreme Court noted that the deceased was pregnant at the time of the incident and she could not have taken a “drastic step of suicide with a womb in her stomach.”
“Thus, the conduct of the appellants, previous to and at the time of the incident, pointed in an incriminating direction. Furthermore, as per the testimonies of PWs, no smell of kerosene could be detected at the place of occurrence or in the body of the deceased which is not consistent with the allegation of selfimmolation using an enormous quantity of kerosene,” the Court remarked.
The Bench noted that the deceased had suffered 100% burn injuries, and the Appellants' explanation of self-immolation had no credibility. The presence of two kerosene cans and the Appellants’ failure to provide immediate medical assistance was incriminating.
Consequently, the Court held, “In light of the foregoing discussion, we are of the considered view that the Trial Court and High Court have correctly appreciated the evidence on record. We are unable to find any infirmity in the findings of the courts below and the impugned order is sustainable in the eyes of law. In the absence of a finding of illegality or perversity or impossibility of the impugned findings, consistent views taken by two courts cannot be disturbed on mere conjectures or surmises.”
Accordingly, the Supreme Court dismissed the Appeal.
Cause Title: Vijaya Singh & Anr. v. State Of Uttarakhand (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 905)
Appearance:
Appellants: Advocates Sachin Patil, Satyajit A Desai, Siddharth Gautam, Abhinav K. Mutyalwar and Sachin Singh; AOR Anagha S. Desai
Respondent: AOR Sudarshan Singh Rawat; Advocates Saakshi Singh Rawat and Rachna Gandhi