A 95-year-old woman has been sentenced to life by the Delhi High Court for burning to death her daughter-in-law and seven-month-old grandson,13 years after a trial court acquitted her in a dowry case. A division bench of justices Pradeep Nandrajog and Sunil Gaur held Sumitra guilty of committing the double murder in collusion with her elder son and daughter-in-law for bringing insufficient dowry,setting aside the trial courts 1998 order,acquitting the trio. The infant was in his mothers arms at the time of the crime. The elder son and daughter-in-law of the convict,however,died early this year before the high court could conclude its hearing on the Delhi Police appeal against their acquittal. The high court convicted Sumitra,relying upon the dying declaration of victim Meenu,who had told the sub-divisional magistrate that her mother-in-law,along with her elder son and daughter-in-law had set her ablaze after dousing her with kerosene oil even as she held her child in her arms. She said though her husband and her father-in-law never harassed her,her mother-in-law and elder brother-in-law and sister-in-law used to harass her for dowry and set her and son ablaze on March 20,1996. Finding the dying declaration of Meenu to be inspiring utmost confidence,with no iota of doubt about her mental faculty,we unhesitatingly rely upon it to hold that the charge of murder stands proved beyond doubt against the respondent-accused,as she was instrumental in setting Meenu on fire, the bench said,convicting the nonagenarian woman. The trial court gave its acquittal order relying on the deposition by the victims mother,who had submitted that her daughter was unconscious when she had tried to talk to her in hospital. Pulling up the trial judge,the High Court said such an approach of the trial court is not only patently perverse but has also resulted in a grave miscarriage of justice. In the instant case,we have found the dying declaration of Meenu completely trustworthy and there is no valid basis upon which it could be said that the declarant was not in a fit state of mind to give the statement. The trial court,however,without pointing out any infirmity in the deposition of SDM has whimsically discarded the resolute testimony of SDM and has strangely relied upon hostile evidence of the victims mother,who has apparently been won over, the high court said. The mental fitness of Meenu to give a statement at about 4:30 pm on the day of incident stands firmly established from the evidence of SDM which has been illegally discarded by the trial court while relying upon the oral hostile testimony of Sudesh Rani,mother of the deceased,resulting in complete miscarriage of justice, the court observed. Meenu had sustained burn injuries in her matrimonial house on March 20,1996 along with her infant child. She was married to Sumitras son Sanjay about one and half years before the incident in Amarpuri in Central Delhi.
