Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court heard a criminal appeal by special leave filed by Bhagwan Kaur, mother of the deceased Shanti Devi alias Prem Lata, against the acquittal of Maharaj Krishan Sharma and his mother Shanti Devi by the Delhi High Court. The respondents had been convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge Delhi under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly causing the death of the deceased by forcibly pouring sulphuric acid into her mouth and sentenced to life imprisonment. The High Court acquitted them by giving the benefit of doubt, finding that the deceased committed suicide. The deceased was married to Maharaj Krishan Sharma on February 20, 1963, and the marital relations were strained due to dowry demands and ill-treatment. The accused had obtained a writing from the deceased stating she wanted divorce in May 1964, and he ran a private college at his residence. In January 1965, one quart of sulphuric acid with 98.9% concentration was purchased for the college. In June 1965, the accused demanded money from his father-in-law for going to the United Kingdom, which was refused. On July 21, 1965, the deceased informed her parents that she was being beaten by her husband. On July 23, 1965, the deceased was found lying on a carpet with froth coming from her mouth and a burning sensation around her, and the accused called a doctor and informed the police. She was taken to Willingdon Hospital, where she allegedly regained consciousness at midnight and wrote a note P.W.1/A implicating her husband and mother-in-law, and also made oral dying declarations to her mother and another woman. She died the next morning. The core legal issues were whether the High Court's acquittal suffered from a glaring infirmity warranting interference under Article 136 of the Constitution, and whether the evidence, particularly the alleged dying declaration and handwriting expert opinion, established murder or suicide. The appellant contended that the accused forcibly administered acid, relying on the written dying declaration and oral statements, while the respondents argued that the deceased swallowed acid herself, citing medical evidence and their own conduct in summoning a doctor. The Supreme Court reiterated that in an appeal under Article 136, it does not normally reappraise evidence unless there is some glaring infirmity resulting in miscarriage of justice. The Court noted that the medical evidence showed the quantity of acid causing internal injuries could not have been forcibly administered, and the conduct of the accused in calling the doctor was consistent with innocence. The accused had given the suicide version at an early stage, while the complainant alleged murder late. The Court held that the evidence of a handwriting expert is generally of a frail character and courts should be wary to give too much weight to it. The High Court had properly appraised the evidence and arrived at a well-reasoned conclusion that the deceased committed suicide by taking sulphuric acid. Accordingly, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the acquittal of the respondents.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Dying Declaration and Handwriting Expert - Reliability of Expert Evidence - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 302 and 34 - The High Court found inherent weaknesses and improbabilities in the alleged written dying declaration P.W.1/A; the Supreme Court held that the evidence of a handwriting expert is generally frail and courts should be wary to give too much weight to it; not much value could be attached to the expert's opinion proving the document to be in the deceased's handwriting. Held that the High Court properly appraised the evidence and the acquittal was justified. B) Constitutional Law - Special Leave Petition - Scope of Interference under Article 136 - Constitution of India, 1950, Article 136 - The Supreme Court does not normally reappraise evidence in an appeal under Article 136 unless there is some glaring infirmity in the High Court's judgment resulting in miscarriage of justice; no such infirmity was pointed out in the present case. Held that the High Court's well-reasoned judgment must be upheld. C) Criminal Law - Murder or Suicide - Circumstantial Evidence and Conduct of Accused - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 302 and 34 - Medical evidence showed that the quantity of acid causing internal injuries could not have been forcibly administered; the conduct of the accused in calling the doctor while the deceased was alive was consistent with innocence; the accused came out with the version of suicide at a very early stage while the complainant alleged murder at a late stage. Held that the circumstances irresistibly pointed to suicide by the deceased taking sulphuric acid, and the appeal failed.
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court's acquittal suffered from glaring infirmity warranting interference under Article 136; whether the alleged dying declaration and handwriting expert evidence proved murder or suicide; reliability of handwriting expert evidence
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed; acquittal upheld; no interference under Article 136; deceased committed suicide by taking sulphuric acid.
Law Points
- The Supreme Court does not normally reappraise evidence under Article 136 unless there is glaring infirmity causing miscarriage of justice
- evidence of handwriting expert is generally frail
- courts must be wary to give too much weight
- conduct of accused in calling doctor consistent with innocence
- medical evidence showed acid quantity could not be forcibly administered
- circumstances pointed to suicide
