Deciding Authority: Supreme Court of India
Name of the Judges: Justice Harjit Singh Bedi, Justice C.K. Prasad
Date of Judgement: 2 August 2010
Facts of the Case: The appellant was married with the deceased Alka after the death of his first wife. As per the prosecution story at about 7.00 a.m. on 6th February, 1990 the deceased suffered serious burn injuries in the kitchen of the house and ultimately died of those injuries. It was the prosecution case that at about 8.30 a.m. on the 9th February 1990 she made a dying declaration to PW.10 – a Police Head Constable, in which she stated that she had a quarrel with her husband over the house-hold chores and over the feeding of the children and she had thereafter poured kerosene on herself and then burnt herself. The Trial Court on a consideration of the evidence convicted the appellant for offences punishable under Section 498-A and to a sentence of one year and under Section 306 to a sentence of four years. The appellant filed an appeal in the High Court of Bombay whereas the State of Maharashtra also filed an appeal pleading for a higher sentence. The appeal filed by the appellant was dismissed. The appeal filed by the State was allowed and the sentence awarded by the Trial Court under Section 306 IPC was enhanced from four to six years. Under these circumstances, the appellant approached the Supreme Court.
Judgment: The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the High Court had observed that the appellant appeared to be of a quarrelsome and aggressive nature and evidence of his behaviour had placed reliance on two letters which required that a heavy sentence should be imposed. However, in the light of the dying declaration made by the deceased that she had quarreled with her husband that very morning (which is a common place happening amongst young married couples), the High Court was not justified in holding that the appellant was liable to an enhancement in the sentence on account of his quarrelsome nature. The Court observed that the interference of the appellate court on the quantum of sentence should be rare and only in exceptional cases. Section 306 of the IPC provides for a sentence which may extend to 10 years. It was therefore the prerogative of the Trial Court to award a sentence up to 10 years. The trial court had given a positive finding that there was no misbehaviour on the part of the appellant over a period of time and the incident was a spontaneous one arising out of a family quarrel in the morning. The finding of the High Court based on two letters written about a year before the incident therefore had little value in the light of the dying declaration of the deceased. The Court also noticed that the incident happened in February, 1990 and the appellant had undergone about four years of the sentence.
Decision: The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, quashed the sentence awarded by the High Court and confirmed the judgment of the Trial Court.
By: Roopali Mohan, 2nd Year, Vivekananda Institute of Professional Studies, New Delhi