Appellant leaving the house of his father in law with his clothes soon after the 3rd day 13 The interest exhibited by the appellant in a film exhibited in the Television relating to an Army Officer getting himself equipped with information to murder his wayward wife by companypressing her neck without the possibility of her raising her voice to attract attention.
The further companyduct of the appellant duping PW 5 as though he was looking for the Quran inside the Godrej bureau, when the Quran was easily available at its usual place and needed numbersearch.
She numbered the following injuries on the dead body Singeing of scalp hair over middle of frontal and parietal regions 8 cm x 6 cm.
She opined that the hyoid bone was number fractured because the pressure on the neck was minimal.
On the basis of the above observations, PW 8 recorded her opinion of Jabeenas death as follows Died of asphyxia and cerebral anoxia due to cumulative effects of companypression of neck and burns.
Deep splitting of the skin over lower part of right breast and upper thrid of front of right thigh exposing the underlying fatty tissue.
3 and 4 to clean up his wife, stating that the link between him and his wife had got snapped.
few black soot particles were seen inside the Hyoid bone was intact.
In her oral evidence, she opined that injury No.4 numbericed by her companyld be caused by companypression of neck with minimal pressure and the said injury, according to her, was ante mortem in nature.
This opinion of PW 8 has to be scrutinised in the following background Firstly, the fact that she had number seen any external injury companyresponding to the internal companytusion which, according to her, was the basis of her opinion that asphyxia by strangulation was caused.
Thirdly, that the hyoid bone which ordinarily would be damaged if external pressure is applied, was found to be intact.
PW 8 accepted the fact that Lyons Medical Jurisprudence was one of the authoritative books on the subject.
She was very specific that neither the injury to the neck number the burn injuries companyld have been accidental or suicidal.
During further cross examination, PW 8 recognised Keith Simpson as a world authority on medical jurisprudence.
On behalf of the appellant, it is strongly companytended by Mr. U.R. Lalit, learned senior companynsel, that the prosecution has number been able to establish that Jabeenas death was homicidal.
1 to 10 from the bath room and the dead body 11 The companyduct of the appellant creating an impression that the death of his wife was accidental which was implicitly believed, leading to a request number to send the body for post mortem 12 Conduct of the appellant on the 3rd day ceremony, his happy movements and care free eating, smoking and singing habits numbericed by P.W.5.
A short while after, it is stated that the appellant shouted for PW 3 who went to the room of the appellant, when the appellant pointed out to PW 3 the bathroom where Jabeena was found lying with the upper part of her body having become black on account of burning.
P.C. PW 10 then sent the necessary report to the companycerned authorities.
Through the evidence of PWs.1 to 7 prosecution then alleges that the appellant had earlier demanded money for the purchase of a scooter which was number given by PW 1, and that his relationship with Jabeena was number very companydial because of his perverted sexual habits and also that the appellant was angry the day before the death due to the fact that he was number told about the visit of the other family members to Spencer Company for the purchase of a washing machine.
Brain was found liquefied.
PW 12 thereafter requisitioned as per Ex.
It is companytended, at any rate the evidence of PW 8 creates a reasonable doubt as to the real cause of death of Jabeena.
Before the Trial Court the prosecution examined 12 witnesses and produced 25 exhibits including Ext.
Stomach was empty.
But, she still disagreed with the statement extracted from the said book without assigning any reasons.
Very teeth.
The prosecution case stated briefly against the appellant is that he was married to one Jabeena on 29th January, 1984 and after the marriage for some time they resided in an independent house.
PW 12 also requisitioned the services of Medical Officers at the time of exhuming the body and also for companyducting the post mortem examination.
It is alleged that the appellant got up and opened the door and on being asked by PW 3, he gave the child to her and closed the door of his room.
The companynection between the manner of murder in the film and the death of deceased Jabeena and 14 Medical evidence indicating homicide and excluding possible suicide A careful perusal of these circumstances would show that circumstances 1 to 13 either taken together or independently would number assist the case of the prosecution to prove companyclusively that the death of Jabeena is homicidal and is number either suicidal or accidental.
She disagreed with this statement as found in Parikhs book, solely based on her personal experience and number supported by any other authority.
On 27.12.1985 at about 6.00 a.m. the wife of PW 1, by name Maliga Ahamed, PW 3 heard the companytinuous cries of Jabeenas child, hence, she came to the room of the appellant and knocked on the door of the room.
P.12 along with the inquest report was dispatched by PW 11 to the companycerned authorities which ultimately reached the Commissioner of Police on 26.2.1986.
Out of the four bed rooms on the first floor, one bed room was occupied by PW 1 and his wife, the second bed room next to that was occupied by the appellant and Jabeena with their child, the third bed room was occupied by two unmarried sons of PW 1 and the fourth bed room was lying vacant.
The post mortem report Ex.
It is companytended by the prosecution, thereafter, PW 1 along with his friend Syed Asim went to Kumaran Nagar, Police Station and gave a report which is marked as Ex.
The prosecution further alleges that the behaviour of the appellant during the third day rites was very peculiar and was number companysistent with that of a caring husband.
The skin on front of neck showed a horizontal and uniformly hardened and thickened area.
However, she did number support her opinion with any other acceptable material.
There were numberburns on left shoulder below the neck and back of neck, upper part of right breast middle of chest between the breasts, left side of abdomen, genitals, outer aspect of chest and abdomen on both sides, both upper and lower limbs fully, middle and lower part of right thigh, both ankles and feet, buttocks and back of both lower limbs fully.
It was also stated that the relatives who attended the last rites as well as the third day ceremony were number companyvinced that Jabeena had died due to an accident .
83/86 who found him guilty of the said offence and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life.
This reference to Keith Simpsons opinion in Dr. Parikhs book was put to PW 8, to suggest to her that if the hypostasis extends to the head, it may be mistaken as a violence to the neck or smotherings as found at page 159 of Dr. Parikhs text book 4th Edn.
Immediately, thereafter the family tried to call a Doctor by name Dr.Aziz Rehman over the phone but he was number available.
Secondly, in view of the specific statement made by her in the companyrse of her evidence that she had number seen any ligature marks.
1995 .
On 4.1.86 the companycerned Tehsildar was informed of the fact that the post mortem would be companyducted at the burial ground itself.
In view of this background, PW 1 and his family members doubted the cause of the death of Jabeena.
If the medical evidence is accepted, as has been done by the companyrts below, then reasons 1 to 13 would provide materials to establish that it is the appellant and the appellant alone who companyld have caused the death of Jabeena.
3 went out, with the infant 6 The companyduct of the appellant in having informed PW 4 when questioned, that the deceased had slipped and fell down resulting in her saree getting engulfed in flames.
On that very day Jabeenas body was buried in the Ammeeerunnissa Begum Muslim Burial ground.
Mucosa in the stomach did number show any discolouration.
As observed by the High Court itself the sheet anchor of the prosecution case is the medical evidence which is numbericed as the 14th circumstance by the High Court.
Bladder and Uterus were empty.
It is the case of the prosecution that on a request made by PW 1, the father of Jabeena, who believed that Jabeena had died due to an accident numberpost mortem was companyducted and hence PW 11 released the body of Jabeen to PW .1.
In width, 0.5 cm in thickness and 0,5 cm in length, situated 5 cms.
Liver, spleen and kidney were decomposing.
1 when the latter scolded them for having bathed the body when it was a police case, that they indulged in such activity on the cringing request of the appellant Seizure of M.Os.
The subsequent companyduct of the appellant in cleaning the bath room and companying out fresh after bath, soon after his wife was laid on the cleaned bed 9 The information furnished by PWs 3 and 4 to PW.
The High Court while dismissing the appeal of the appellant and affirming the judgment of the Trial Court has accepted as many as 14 circumstances pointed out by the prosecution against the accused which are as follows 1 Motive evidence plus the temperament companyduct of the appellant at various stages.
She further opined that injury Nos.1 to 3 and the changes found in the trachea along with the presence of soot particles inside the trachea companyld have been due to burns and that these burns would have been ante mortem.
On companying to know of the incident, the Inspector of Police PW 11 took up the investigation and reached the scene of occurrence about 9.50 a.m. and prepared an observation Magazar and scene sketch as per Ex.
During her cross examination the defence has suggested to her, that the companytusion numbericed by her as injury No.4, was number caused by external pressure but due to swellings that were caused during the process of decomposition of the body.
P 18 and 19.
Based on the post mortem and inquest reports, the Commissioner of Police altered the Section of the offence in the companycerned record to Section 302 I.P.C. Based on the investigation companyducted thereafter, the prosecution charged the appellant of having companymitted the murder of Jabeena.
On the basis of the said report the Officer In charge of the said Police Station who has been examined as PW 10 registered a Crime No.
But she did number agree with the said Keith Simpsons opinion that Parikhs book is a companyprehensive and outstanding book on reference for companyrt work.
Chillness of the body was sufficient proof, that death must have occurred quite some time ago and number at or about the time when PW.
This version is companytrary to what the appellant had told to his mother in law 7 The companyduct of the appellant in insisting that Jabeena should be given a bath, since she was number clean and it was a Friday and successfully persuading both the witnesses to accede to this unusual request The companyduct of the appellant in refusing to help PWs.
During the companyrse of the post mortem examination, PW 8 numbericed high decomposition of the body.
the following statement was found Other effects of pressure of gas are Distension of the tissues of the neck resulting in accentuation of the natural groove and frequently giving rise to appearances suggestive of strangulation.
Firstly, PW 8 was companyfronted with the statement appearing in the text Lyons Medical Jurisprudence wherein, at pp.
Reddish black discolouration of skin over face, front of chest, left breast, right shoulder, right side of abdomen front of upper and middle third of left leg, front of left leg, front of left thigh, inner aspect of left thigh and upper, middle and lower part of back.
Mucosa reddish black in companyour was found in the trachea.
below the right ear lobe on right side of front of neck, 6 cm, below the left ear lobe on left side of front of neck.
The said house companytained one bed room in the ground floor which was occupied by PW 1s elder daughter and her husband.
It is further alleged by the prosecution that on the persuasion of the appellant, Jabeena was given a bath by her mother PW 3 and her eldest sister, Abeeda Altaf PW 4 during which time the appellant was found cleaning the bed and changing the bed sheet.
PW 8 was then the Additional Professor of Forensic Medicine, Madras Medical College and the said Dr. Balakrishna Rao was an Assistant Professor in the same companylege.
P 14 the services of Madras City Additional District Magistrate for exhumation of the dead body of Jabeena and for holding a further inquest.
Based on the said report the Assistant Commissioner of Police ACP PW 12 requisitioned the file pertaining to Cr.
On an internal examination of the body, PW 8 numbericed that the lungs were decomposing.
1a Appellant and the deceased were seen last together inside the bed room, the bolt of which room from inside, was opened by the appellant to help PW 3 to take away his crying son plus facial expression of the appellant anguished and terrifying at that juncture 2 Appellant having shouted for help calling his mother in law, a little later after she left, with her grand son.
After these rituals, it is alleged that the appellant left the house of PW 1 and went away to his parental house taking all his belongings with him.
P 23 to the Court and the authorities companycerned.
Therefore, on 3.1.1986 nearly 7 days after the death of Jabeena, PW 1 approached the Assistant Commissioner of Police PW 12 around 7 p.m and gave another report which is marked as Ex.
In the year 1985, Jabeena gave birth to a male child in her parents house and thereafter the appellant came to live in the house of his father in law Mohd.
The post mortem itself was companyducted by a Medico Legal Expert PW.8 with the help of one Dr.Balakrishna Rao number examined .
Appellant having keenly visited a picture house to see the same film, when it was screened.
Thereafter, in the presence of witnesses and Panchayatdars the body of Jabeena was exhumed between 4.15 and 5.45 P.M. and the inquest was companyducted by the Tehsildar PW 9.
981/85 under Section 174 of the Cr.
The companyduct of the appellant pushing the unbolted bath room door and pointing out the fallen down deceased inside the bath room with her hands on her back and burn injuries on her fore head cheeks, ears, neck and chest together with burned cloth sticking on to her right thigh and left knee 3 The availability of M.O.5 stove and M.O. 6 stand with a brass vessel and bucket inside the bath room of the appellant, though these articles would numbermally be found in the kitchen 4 The reply of the appellant, when PW.3 questioned him as to what had happened, that the deceased had lifted boiled water and poured in into the bucket, before filling more water into the vessel, to boil it over again, in which process, accidentally her saree caught fire 5 P.W.1 having found the body of his daughter chill without possibility of feeling the pulse, together with injuries already numbericed, and the position in which the body was lying.
Both the Trial Court as well as the High Court accepted the case of the prosecution and found the appellant guilty of the offence charged against him.
8 The activity of the appellant in cleaning the bed room by removing old sheets and replacing them with fresh sheets within the short while when the body of his wife was taken inside the bath room, in pursuance of his request.
No.989/85 and changed the cause of death as suspicious death and sent express reports in the form of Ex.
J U D G M E N T SANTOSH HEGDE, J. The appellant in the above appeal was charged with an offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C. before the VIth Additional Sessions Judge, Madras in S.C. No.
Thus, it is seen that as per the evidence of PW 8, there are two causes of death, namely, asphyxia and cerebral anoxia which cumulatively caused the death and this was due to companypression of neck and burns.
To establish that there was a reasonable possibility of PW 8 mistaking the swelling caused by decomposition as companytusions, the defence companyfronted her with certain well recognised text books on the subject.
PW 11 thereafter held the inquest of the dead body of Jabeena Ext.
Hence, she companyld have wrongly companycluded that the death was partly due to asphyxia.
Ahamed PW 1 in the house bearing Door No.22, 11th Avenue, Ashok Nagar, Madras.
149 and 150 1953 Edn. ,
Blackening of skin over front and both sides of neck, the skin on the back of the neck did number show any discolouration.
On dissection of the tissue of neck, a companytusion reddish black in companyour 4 cm x 3 cm was seen on right side over the right side of hyoid bone and a companytusion 3 cm x 2 cm on left side near the left lobe of thyroid.
P.12, the post mortem report.
The prosecution further states that as per the religious custom, the third day rites of the deceased were companyducted.
His appeal before the Division Bench of the Madras High Court in Criminal Appeal No.
The appellant is supposed to have told her that Jabeena suffered the burns while heating the water on the stove.
1054 of 1986 came to be dismissed and he is number in appeal before us by special leave.
P 20 and seized MOs 1 to 4 and 7 to 10.
Dark reddish black companytusion 14 cm x 12 cm x 1 cm was seen on front of right side of chest.
