Rakesh Kumar alias Rinku vs The State of Haryana

Mehtab S. Gill, J.—This is an appeal against the judgment dated 22.8.2001of the learned Sessions Judge, Sirsa, whereby he convicted Rakesh Kumar alias Rinku son of Joginder Pal u/s 302 IPC and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment. A fine of Rs. 15,000/- was also imposed on him, in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for six months. The case of the prosecution is unfolded by the statement Ex.PA of Jyoti Bhatia w/o Rinku Manchanda given to ASI Ram Kishan, Police Station Ding, District Sirsa.

Jyoti Bhatia stated, that she is residing in Mandi Dabwali on the given address. She works in an orchestra. Earlier she had married to Kamal Gupta of New Delhi. It was a love marriage. From that wedlock, a son, Annu was born. Annu was six years of age on the day of occurrence. She was not happy with the marriage with Kamal Gupta, which ultimately culminated in divorce. About one year before this occurrence, Jyoti Bhatia married Rinku Manchanda (accused). Rinku hated her son Annu, as he was from her first husband. Many times Rinku had threatened and told her that her son Annu should be adopted by someone, otherwise he would kill him. On 29.2.2000 at 2.30 p.m., Annu had passed urine on the bed. Rinku got an excuse to beat Annu. He gave him fist, slap and kick blows on the abdomen etc. He started throttling Annu with a Chunni. Jyoti Bhatia raised an alarm. Vijay Kumar son of Naresh Kumar came there and tried to save Annu. But her son had succumbed to the injuries and throttling. On the basis of this statement, FIR Ex. PA was recorded on 29.2.2000 at 6.40 p.m. The special report reached the S.D.J.M., Dabwali on the same day at 8.15 p.m.

The prosecution to prove its case brought into the witness box Jyoti Bhatia PW1, Vijay Kumar PW2, Dr. T.R. Mittal PW3, SI Babu Lal PW4, ASI Ram Kishan PW5 and Mohan Lal Constable PW6.

Learned Counsel for the appellant has argued, that the crucial piece of evidence i.e. the bed sheet had not been taken into possession. If the bed sheet had been taken into possession, it could have been sent to the forensic science laboratory, to know as to whether there was any urine on the bed sheet or not. The prosecution version would have then been effectively linked. He has further argued, that there are material discrepancies in the statements of Jyoti Bhatia PW1 and Vijay Kumar PW2, the eye witnesses to the occurrence. In fact Jyoti Bhatia PW1 was having an affair with Vijay Kumar PW2 and it is they who eliminated the child.

Even If we take the prosecution version to be truthful, at the most, the case would fall with the ambits of Section 304 Part II IPC. There was no intention on the part of the appellant to beat the child to death. Learned Counsel for the State has argued, the FIR is very prompt. This itself is going a long way in proving the case of the prosecution. No evidence has come on record from the side of the appellant to show, that he was at Abohar on the day of occurrence. If deceased Annu had fallen from the jeep, he would not just have had contusions on his body, but a number of abrasions also. Appellant has stated in his statement u/s 313 Cr.P.C., that Annu had fallen on a heap of stones. Injury No. 13, which was a kick blow given to the deceased in the abdomen, was the fatal injury. No explanation has come from the side of the deceased as to how the dead body reached his house. If Annu had been injured on the way coming back from Ganganagar to Dabwali, he would have been taken to the hospital first. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record with their assistance.

The recording of the FIR Ex. PA in this case is very prompt. Occurrence had taken place on 29.2.2000 at 2.30 p.m. Jyoti Bhatia PW1 recorded her statement, on the basis of which FIR came into existence at 6.40 p.m. and the special report reached the S.D.J.M., Dabwali on the same day i.e. on 29.2.2000 at 8.15 p.m. The promptness with which the FIR Ex.PA was recorded and the special report reaching the S.D.J.M. itself goes a long way in proving the case of the prosecution. Jyoti Bhatia PW1 has categorically stated, that when her child, who was born out of her first marriage, urinated on the bed, appellant got infuriated and started giving him slaps and kicks. This was only an excuse to finish him, as the appellant did not have any love for his step son. Vijay Kumar PW2, who is a neighbour, came there, after hearing the shouts for help and saw appellant giving a beating to Annu. Appellant then left. A doctor was called immediately to attend to deceased Annu, but the doctor declared him dead. Injury No. 13 the kick blow given in the abdomen, ruptured the liver of the child, who was just six years old then. This was the fatal injury.

Appellant has taken the plea of alibi. He has stated, that he was away at Abohar, but no evidence has come on record from his side to show, that on the day of occurrence, he was not at home, but at Abohar. Appellant has appeared as a witness against himself i.e. as DW1. He has stated, that Annu died, as the deceased along with Jyoti Bhatia PW1 were coming back from Ganganagar to Dabwali in a jeep. The driver of the jeep did not notice the speed breaker on the road and applied the brakes. Deceased Annu fell on the road and sustained injuries. There was a heap of stones lying on the road, by which deceased Annu got injured. He has further stated, that he came to know about the death of Annu on 1.3.2000, when he alighted from the bus at bus stand Dabwali. This statement of the appellant, when he appeared as witness against himself, leaves a lot of questions unanswered. Appellant has not brought any witness to substantiate what he has stated while appearing as DW1, either from Abohar where he had gone or as to the person who told him that Annu had died.

The body of the deceased was recovered from the house of the appellant. No explanation has come from the side of the appellant as to how the body reached his house. If we take that it is a case of an accident, then the deceased would have had a number abrasions on his body, as he had fallen allegedly on stones. There are about 11 contusions and one abrasion. These contusions are fist blows and slaps, which were given to the child.

We do not find any infirmity in the judgment of the learned trial Court. Dismissed.