‘Mother has no reason to falsely name her own’: Delhi HC upholds conviction of son, husband for setting woman on fire in 2000

Two ‘dying declarations’

The victim was on the terrace of her home in 2000 when she suffered burn injuries at 6 am and was taken to the hospital by her son and daughter. Her husband did not accompany them despite being at home. She, however, succumbed to the injuries later that day after giving two dying declarations – one to the treating doctor and the other to the investigation officer – where she blamed her husband and adult son for her situation.

A First Information Report (FIR) was subsequently lodged, and a trial court later found the two accused guilty and convicted them under sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in 2002.

Challenging the trial court’s conviction, the two moved the high court in 2002. However, during the pendency of the appeal, the woman’s husband died, and the son went absconding and was declared a ‘proclaimed offender’.

‘No scope for selfishness’ in mother-child bond

The counsel appearing for the appellants, Rakesh Tewari, argued that it was a case of suicide, holding that the deceased was not in a position to speak since she had 100 per cent burn injuries, including on her face and lips. He also contended that the family had migrated from Afghanistan and was not well versed in any other language, and therefore the doctor and the investigating officer were not in a position to understand her dying declarations.

The prosecution, however, argued that there was no reason to doubt or discard the dying declaration.

Authoring the judgment, Justice Vimal Kumar Yadav remarked, “A mother is the only person who carries you for nine months in her belly, three years in her arms and forever in her heart”. Drawing attention to the famous lines of a song, “Poot kapoot sune hai par na maata sunee kumaata”, the court stated that the bond between mother and children is so strong, “pure” and aboveboard that there is no scope for any sort of selfishness.

Considering the facts of the case surrounding the victim’s death, the high court held that the facts cumulatively indicated that the only conclusion was that the incident was neither ‘accidental’ nor ‘suicidal’, leaving only the possibility of homicide. The high court subsequently upheld the trial court’s order.

From the homepage

‘She wanted to resign’: BLO dies by suicide, her family in Bengal alleges ‘work pressure’

MP’s elite Hawk Force loses decorated officer in encounter with armed Maoists

Who is Anmol Bishnoi? 5 things about the gangster extradited to India from US