FOR THE lack of mention of the plural of “nanad” (sister-in-law) in the dying declaration of a woman killed by her in-laws in 2013, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted benefit of doubt to two convicts in a dowry death case and acquitted them of the charges framed against them. The two women, both sisters-in-law of the victim, were convicted in March 2015 by a Bhiwani Court. “There is no occasion to imply or infer that ‘nanad’ means both the sisters-in-law, when admittedly, as per common prudence, the word ‘nanad’ would take to mean singular and not plural. Of course, we would have not interfered with the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, had the deceased stated ‘nanadon’ (sisters-in-law) in her dying declaration,” reads the judgment by Justices Ajay Tewari and Harnaresh Singh Gill. In 2013, one Babita was set on fire by her in-laws including the husband. In her dying declaration, while mentioning her husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law as the perpetrators, Babita had also made mention of ‘nanad’ in the statement recorded before the magistrate in Rohtak. The victim had two sisters-in-law, who were earlier found innocent by the DSP but subsequently charged and pronounced guilty after trial. The division bench said the veracity of the dying declaration as far as other accused are concerned is “indubitable” but the mention of the word ‘nanad’ in the dying declaration leads it to observe that it is not safe to record the finding of conviction as regards both the sisters-in-law. “We are unable to pin-point the word ‘nanad’ as to on which of the two, the finger had been raised by the victim,” reads the verdict. “It has come in evidence that both of them were married and residing at their matrimonial homes and thus, their very presence at the time of occurrence could not be established,” reads the ruling, adding that the dying declaration regarding them is ambiguous. The ruling adds, “Since ‘nanad’ had not been specifically pointed out in the admitted dying declaration, we hereby give benefit of doubt to appellants No.4 and 5 (the two sisters-in-law)”. The court has, meanwhile, upheld the conviction of the husband, mother-in-law and father-in-law of the victim. The couple had married in 2005. It was in 2013 that she was burnt by the accused and admitted with 80-90 per cent injuries in the hospital where she died later.
