Full Judgment Text
STATE OF M.P.
v.
MUNNIBAI & ANR.
(Criminal Appeal No. 1298 of 2002)
AUGUST 28, 2008
[Dr. Arjit Pasayat, P. Sathasivam and Aftab Alam, JJ]
The Order of the Court was delivered by
Dr.ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench
of the Madhya Pradesh High Court directing acquittal of the
respondents Munni Bai and Gendalal. The accused persons faced
trial for alleged commission of offences punishable under Section
302 and Section 328 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code,
1860 (in short ‘IPC’). The accused persons were found guilty and
sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and five years by learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Gadarwara.
The prosecution version as unfolded during trial is as follows:-
Munni Bai (PW.3) is a professional dancer and prior to the date
of incident, she used to reside with the Tirath Singh (hereinafter
referred to as ‘deceased’) as his keep. Accused Gendalal and
accused Mulayam Singh (since absconding) wanted that Munni Bai
should live with them as keep, but she was not willing. While Munni
Bai was staying with deceased Tirath Singh accused Gendalal and
accused Mulayam Singh came to the village and invited them for
dance function in the village. On their invitation, the deceased and
Munni Bai came to village Sirsiri, where they were kept at the
residence of one Shankar Barua. There they ate Roti and Dal;
brought by Gendalal and accused Mulayam Singh spent the night in
the house of Shankar Barua. In the morning, (Munni Bai) PW3.
intended going to village Oriya but was stopped by accused Mulayam
Singh and he stated that dance and song programme shall be held.
Around noon time accused Mulayam Singh took her and deceased
Tirath Singh for taking food at the residence of Gendalal. Munni Bai
and deceased Tirath took food at the residence of Gendalal and slept
there. When they woke up in the evening, deceased and accused
persons smoked ‘Ganja’ and took ‘Thandai’. Thereafter, accused
Mulayam Singh and Gendalal Singh brought two plates containing
food articles including ‘Halua’. While P.W.3 Munni Bai ate Halua, she
found the taste to be pungent and thereafter she did not further eat
the Halua. After taking the food, deceased Tirath Singh and Munni
Bai became unconscious and thereafter they were taken by Gendalal
and accused Mulayam Singh to the residence of Shankar Barua and
thereafter to the house of (Bhagwat Singh) P.W.13 From there, the
deceased was taken to village Oriya Ghat in a bullock cart . While he
was being taken to Udaipur hospital by his brother (Khet Singh)
PW.12 , he died and the dead body was taken to the Udaipur Police
Station. Information was recorded at the village and the same was
forwarded to Saikheda Police Station on the basis of which offence
under Sections 328 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code was
registered.
During the course of investigation, dead body of Tirath Singh
was sent for post-mortem examination which was conducted by Dr.
Narendra Kumar Palod (PW.19). According to the post mortem
report, death of Tirath Singh had occurred because of respiratory and
circulatory failure and may be because of poison. The viscera of
deceased was sent to the State Forensic Science Laboratory, Sagar
for chemical examination. The same was found to contain zink
phosphide. Police after investigation submitted charge-sheet against
the appellants and Mulayam Singh (since absconding) for offence
under Sections 328 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Appellants
denied to have committed any offence and their plea is that they
have been falsely implicated in the case.
As the appellant denied to have committed any offence and took the
plea of false implication, trial was held. In order to further its case, the
prosecution examined nine witnesses. Munnibai (PW3) was stated to be the
star witness. Her witness was to the effect that the food was served to the
deceased and to her by the accused persons and one Mulayam Singh who
had absconded. The Trial court found the evidence of PW3 to be reliable
and directed conviction and imposed sentences as afore-noted. The accused
persons preferred appeal before the High Court. The primary reason for
the High Court directing acquittal was that it was inconceivable that
accused Munni bai would be a party to a plan that her husband would keep
Munni Bai (PW3) as his keep. It was also found rather improbable that
absconding accused Mulayam Singh and Gendalal would have a common
motive to keep Munni Bai (PW3) with them when one of them was married
to accused Munnibai. So far as the question of administering poison is
concerned, the High Court found that there was no evidence to show that
any of the accused persons administered poison. The evidence of Munni Bai
(PW3) was to the effect that the poison was mixed with the Halua and she
found the taste to be pungent and did not have the whole of halua served to
her; but the deceased took the whole quantity which was offered to him. The
High Court noted that she did not know from where the Halua came.
Interestingly, there was no forensic examination of the halua which is
supposed to have contained the poison by PW3 and shared by the deceased.
In that view of the matter, we are not inclined to interfere with the judgment
of the acquittal impugned in this appeal which is accordingly dismissed.