Amity Moot Respondent

TH
4 AMITY MOOT COURT COMETITION, 2017
BEFORE THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
IN THE MATTER OF
RAGHAVENDRA SINGH SHEKHAWAT & ORS.

(APPELANTS)
VERSUS
STATE OF RAJASTHAN
(RESPONDENT)
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT
MEMORANDUM ON BEFALF OF RESPONDENT

4TH AMITY MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2017.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INDEX OF AUTHOROTIES....
III LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS....
.....VII SYNOPSIS OF
FACTS...VIII
ISSUES
RAISED...............................................................................................
....IX
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS.
.......X ARGUMENTS
ADVANCED.........1
[I.] THE ABOVE GROUNDS ARE SUFFICIENT TO DECIDE THE

GUILT OF THE ACCUSED....
......1
[I.1.] ACCUSED PERSONS ARE GUILTY OF MURDER AS PER 302 OF I.P.C...1

..
[I.2.] ACCUSED PERSONS ARE GUILTY UNDER 120B OF I.P.C READ WITH 34
OF I.P.C......8
[II.] FIR AND STATEMENTS MADE UNDER 161 OF Cr.P.C.

ARE VITAL
EVIDENCES AND THE ACCUSED PERSONS CAN BE
PUNISHED ON THE
BASIS OF THESE EVIDENCES.
..11
[II.1.] FIR IS A VITAL PIECE OF EVIDENCE ....12
[III.2.] STATEMENTS RECORDED UNDER 161 OF CR.P.C. CAN BE USED FOR

PURPOSES OTHER THAN CONTRADICTION. ....13
[II.3.] ACCUSED PERSONS CAN BE PUNISHED ON THE BASIS OF THESE
EVIDENCES ........14
[III.] EXPERT OPINION IS IMPORTANT PIECE OF EVIDNECE

AND THE
ACCUSED CAN BE PUNISHED ON BASIS OF POST MORTEM
REPORT...16
[III.1.] EVIDENTIARY VALUE OF EXPERT OPINION...16
[III.2.] ACCUSED PERSONS CAN BE PUNISHED ON THE BASIS OF POST

MORTEM REPORT .17
MEMORANDUM ON BEFALF OF RESPONDENT

TH
4 AMITY MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2017.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
[IV.] 304B OF I.P.C IS APPLICABLE....

..18
[IV.1.] THE DEATH OF A WOMAN SHOULD BE CAUSED BY BURNS OR BODILY

INJURY OR OTHERWISE THAN UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCE...19
[IV.2.] SUCH DEATH SHOULD HAVE OCCURRED WITHIN SEVEN YEAR OF

HER MARRIAGE. ...19
[IV.3.] VICTIM WAS SUBJECTED TO CRUELTY OR HARASSMENT BY HER

HUSBAND OR ANY RELATIVE OF HER HUSBAND..19
[IV.4.] SUCH CRUELTY OR HARASSMENT SHOULD BE FOR OR IN CONNECTION

WITH DEMAND OF DOWRY. ...21
[IV.5.] SUCH CRUELTY AND HARASSMENT WAS MADE SOON BEFORE HER
DEATH. .23
[IV.6.] PRESUMPTION OF DOWRY DEATH CAN BE RAISED UNDER 113B OF

THE EVIDENCE ACT....24
CONCLUSION.....
..XIII
PRAYER...............................................................................................................................XI
V
3|Page
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
TABLE OF CASES.
S. no. Name of the Case Citation

1. Anand Kumar v. State of MP. (2009) 3 SCC 799.
2. Anant Chintaman Lagu v. State of Bombay. AIR 1960 SC 500.
3. Badan Sharma v. State of Bihar. (2008) 13 SCC 233.
4. Bakshish Ram And Anr. v. State of Punjab. AIR 2013 SC 1484.
5. Bakshish Ram v. State of Punajb. AIR 2013 SC 1484.
6. Baldev Krishan v. State of Haryana. AIR 1997 SC 1666.
7. Baldev Singh v. State of Punjab. (2006) CrLJ 4070.
8. Bathula Nagamalleswara Rao v. State (Represented by (2011) 11 SCC 722.
public prosecutor)
9. Benjamin v. State. (Represented by Inspector of Police). (2008) 3 SCC 745.
10. Bhagwan Das v. State of U.P. 1974 CrLJ 751.
11. Bhajan Singh v. State of Haryana. AIR 2011 SC 2552.
12. Bhupinder Singh v. State of Punjab. (1988) 3 SCC 513.
13. Bhupinder Singh v. State of Punjab. (1988) 3 SCC 513.
14. Brahm Swaroop v. State of U.P. AIR 2011 SC 280.
15. Dalel Singh v. Jag Mohan Singh. 1981 CrLJ 667(Del).
16. Dayal Singh v. State of Uttranchal. AIR 2012 SC 3046.
17. Deen Dayal v. State of U.P. (2009) 11 SCC 157.
18. Devi Lal v. State of Rajasthan. (2007) 14 SCC 176.
19. Dhian Singh v State of Punjab. AIR 2005 SC1450.
20. Firozuddind Bashiruddin and Ors. v. State of Kerala. (2001) 7 SCC 596.
21. Girdhar Shankar v. State of Maharashtra. (2004) SCC Online 112.
22. Girdhar Shankar v. State of Maharashtra. AIR 2002 SC 2078.
23. Goddapa v. State of Karnataka. (2013) 3 SCC 675.
24. Hari Narayan Singh v. State of W.B. 2009 SCC OnLine Cal 1206
25. Jitendra Kumar v. State of Haryana. AIR 2012 SC 2488.
26. Jodha Khoda Rabari v. State of Gujrat. 1992 CrLJ 3298(Guj).
III | P a g e
TH
27. K. Hassem v. State of T.N.. 2005 CrLJ 143.

28. Kalyan Singh v. State of UP. AIR 2001 2976.
29. Kapil Singh v. State of Bihar. 1990 CrLJ 1248.
30. Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab. (1994) 3 SCC 569.
31. Keshab Chanda Panda v. State of Orissa. (1995) 1 CrLJ 174 (ori).
32. Kirpal Singh v. State of UP. (2010) 3 SCC 347.
33. Krishan Lal v. Union of India. 1994 CrLJ 2472 (P&H).
34. Krsihan Singh v. State. 2003) 7 SCC 56.
35. Kundala Bala Subramanyam v. state of A.P. 1993 AIR SCW 1321.
36. Lallan Rai v. State of Bihar. AIR 2003 SC 333.
37. Lennnart Schussler And Anr.v. Director of Enforcement AIR 1970 SC 549.
And Anr.
38. M Narayan v state of Karnataka. (2015) 6 SCC 465.
39. M.S. Reddy v. State Inspector of Police ACB Nellore. 1993 CrLJ 558.
40. Malay Kumar Ganguly v. Dr. Sukumar Mukherjee. (2009) 9 SCC 221.
41. Mehmood v. State of U.P. (2007) 14 SCC 16.
42. Mehraj Singh v. State of U.P. (1994) 5 SCC 188.
43. Mrinal Das v. State of Tripura. (2011) 9 SCC 479.
44. MSED Co. Ltd v. Dattar Ltd. (2010) 10 SCC 479.
45. NCT of Delhi v. Navjot Sandhu. (2005) 11 SCC 600
46. P.H. Basha v. State of AP. 2012 CrLJ 4230
47. Raghunandan v. state of U.P. AIR 1974 SC 463.
48. Rajamal v. State of T.N. 1993 CrLJ 3029 (Mad)
49. Rajinder Singh v. State of Punjab AIR 2015 SC 1359.
50. Ramesh Chandra Argrwal v. Regency Hotel. (2009) 3 SCC (civ) 40.
51. Rattan v. Reginam. (1971) 1 WLR 801.
52. S. Tripath Patra v. State of Odisha. 2003 CrLJ 1591.
53. Satvir Singh v. State of Punjab AIR 2001 SC 2828.
54. Shangara v. State of Punjab. 1995 SCC (cri) 163.
55. Sonali Mukherjee v. Union of India. (2010) 15 SCC 25.
56. State of Haryana v. Sher Singh. AIR 1981 SC 1021.
IV | P a g e
TH
57. State HP v Jai Chand. (2013) 10 SCC 298.

58. State of Karnataka v. Ballappa. 1999 CrLJ 3064 (kant).
59. State of Kerala v. Samuel. AIR 1961 Ker 99.
60. State of Maharashtra v. Ahmed Shaikh Babajan and Ors. (2009 ) 14SCC 267.
61. State of Rajasthan v. Mahavir Prasad. 1998 CrLJ 4064.
62. State of Rajasthan v. Jaggu ram. (2009) 15 SCC 292.
63. State of T.N. through SP CBI/SIT v. Nalini,. AIR 1999 SC 2640.
64. State of U.P. v. Sughar Singh. AIR 1978 SC 191.
65. Sujot Sen v. State of W.B. (2007) 6 SCC 32.
66. Thulia Kali v. State of T.N. (1972) 3 SCC 393.
67. Titli v. Alfred Robert Jones. AIR 1934 All 273.
68. Virendra Singh v. State of M.P. (2010) 8 SCC 407.
69. Yogesh v. State of Maharashtra (2008) 10 SCC 394.
70. Yusuf S. K. v. State. (1963) 1 CrLJ 550(Ori).
STATUTES
1. The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

2. The Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
3. The Indian Penal Code, 1860.
4. Dowry Protection Act, 1961.
V|Page
TH
BOOKS
th
1. I, III, IV Nelson R. A. Indian Penal Code, 10 Ed. (2008).
rd
2. Ratanlal and Dhirajlal, The Indian Penal Code, 33 Ed. (2011).
th
3. KD Gaur, Textbook on Indian Penal Code, 6 Ed (2016).
th
4. C K Takwani, Indian Penal Code, 7 Ed (2014).
st
5. Harish Chander, The Indian Penal Code - A Critical Commentary 1 Ed (2017).
th
6. Avtar Singh , The law of Evidence, 20 Ed (2014).
st
7. Ram Jethamalani and D.S.Chopra , Law of Evidences , 1 Ed (2013).
th
8. Monit Mir , The law of Evidence, 10 Ed (2016).
nd
9. Ratanlal and Dhirajlal,, The Law of Evidence, 22 Ed. (2006).
st
10. Ratanlal Dhirajlal, The Code of Criminal Procedure, 21 Ed (2013).
th
11. D.D. Basu, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 5 Ed (2014).
th
12. S.N. Mishra, The Code of Criminal Procedure, 12 Ed (2016).
th
13. K D Guar, Textbook on the Code of Criminal Procedure, 6 Ed (2016).
14. Dr. Jaising P. Modi, A Textbook of Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology, 24th Ed
(2012).
15. Krishan Vij, Textbook of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology: Principles and Practice,
th
6 Ed (2014).
VI | P a g e
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AIR All India Reporter
All Allahabad High Court
Cal Calcutta High Court
Cri LJ / Cr LJ Criminal Law Journal
Cr.P.C. Code of Criminal Procedure

Del. Delhi High Court
DW Defense Witness
Ed. Edition
Guj Gujarat High Court

I.P.C Indian Penal Code
IC Indian Cases
Mad Madras High Court

n. Foot Note no.
Ori Orissa High Court
p. Page No.
P&H Punjab and Haryana High Court
Pat Patna High Court
PW Prosecution Witness
Raj Rajasthan High Court
SC Supreme Court
SCC Supreme Court Cases
SCJ Supreme Court Journal
SCR Supreme Court Reporter

Section
VII | P a g e
SYNOPSIS OF FACTS
SYNOPSIS OF FACTS
BACKGROUND
st th
Gauri and Raghavendra Singh Shekhawat got married on 1 January, 2013. On 20 Feb, 2015,
Gauris father Charan Singh got a call from Raghvendra stating that Gauri has committed
Suicide at 7 am of the same day. After getting the news, Charan Singh and his family reached
Gauris home. They found that Raghavendra and his family were ready to take her body for
funeral. Seeing bruises on her body they decided to file an F.I.R. before the police. After that,
the body was sent for Post- Mortem.
STATEMENTS RECORDED
1. Following statements were made by Charan Singh in First Information Report-
th
I. After the marriage, till the death of Bhim Singh everything was good. On 10 December,
2013 Gauri called her mother and said her mother in law had made a demand of Rs 20
lakhs for establishing an electronic showroom and this demand was fulfilled.
th
II. On 10 January a demand of motorbike was also made and this was also fulfilled. On
th
10 March Gauri came to Jodhpur. Raghvendra called her once every week. She told
her sister that her in laws are pressurising her for a male child.
th
III. On 15 May, 2014 a girl child was born but no one from her in-laws came to see her.
th
On 15 October, 2014 Gauris brother in law Dev Singh and sister-in-law Nidhi came
and took Gauri and the child with them. After that, Gauri could talk to her family only
once in a week in presence of Raghavendra.
2. Police recorded following statements under 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code during
the investigation
th
I. Raghvendra called Charan Singh at 10:10 pm on 20 February. He told that Gauri has
committed suicide at 7 am but Charan Singh alleged that she has been murdered
because he was suspicious of the time lapse of 14 hour
II.Gauris mother Leelavati confirmed that she had seen bruises on her body
III. According to Mamta, Gauri called her at 7:45 AM on the same day. She sounded tensed
and wanted to tell something but the call got disconnected within a few second
VIII | P a g e
TH
SYNOPSIS OF FACTS
3. Raghavendras family members gave the following statements to the police during the
investigation-
th
I. Raghvendra stated on 20 February that, he went for a walk at 6 am and when he
returned at 7 am he found Gauris dead body on the bed and a bottle of sleeping pills
in her hands after which he called his mother. His mother called her younger son Dev
Singh.
II. He had an argument with Gauri on 18 February about shifting separately from entire
family which he refused and Gauri injured herself and this led to bruises on her body.
III. They were living a happy married life till his fathers death but after that he was
burdened with familys responsibilities and could not spend time with her.
IV. Yashodhara Devi stated that Gauri had demanded a necklace from her and when she
refused on the grounds of financial incapacity she said she will ask her father to pay for
it.
V. Nidhi stated that Gauri never helped in household chores and made the excuse of her
health.
POST MORTEM REPORT

Post Mortem report consisted of following observations-
I. The time of the death of the deceased is between 06:00 AM to 08:00 AM approx.
II. The cause of death is intake of excessive sleeping pill
III. The bruises found on the body of deceased could be inflicted by someone else.
IV. The bruises were caused 12 hours before the death of the deceased.
CONVICTION
The sessions court convicted husband of deceased, Raghvendra, her Brother-in-law, Dev
Singh, her mother-in-law Yashodhara Devi, and her sisters-in-law Nidhi and Anita under
302, 304-B, and 120-B read with 34 of Indian Penal Code.
APPEAL
Accused persons filed an appeal before the Rajasthan High Court and High Court upheld the
decision of Sessions Court. A further appeal has been filed before the Supreme Court of India
IX | P a g e
ISSUES RAISED
I. WHETHER THE GIVEN GROUNDS ARE SUFFICIENT TO

DECIDE
THE GUILT OF ACCUSED?
II. WHAT IS THE EVIDENTIARY VALUE OF F.I.R. AND

STATEMENTS
MADE UNDER 161 OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE?
AND CAN
THE ACCUSED BE PUNISHED ONLY ON BASIS OF
THESE
EVIDENCES?
III. WHAT IS THE EVIDENTIARY VALUE OF EXPERT

OPINION? AND
CAN AN ACCUSED BE PUNISHED ON THE BASIS OF POST
MORTEM
REPORT?
IV. WHETHER 304B OF I.P.C IS APPLICABLE OR NOT?

X|Page
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS
ARGUMENT - I
THE GIVEN GROUNDS ARE SUFFICIENT TO

DECIDE THE GUILT OF
ACCUSED.
It is humbly submitted before this Honble Court that, the accused persons are guilty for
committing the offence of Murder of Gauri under 302 of I.P.C. and criminal conspiracy under
120B read with 34 of I.P.C. Since accused persons had the intention to cause the death of the
deceased and there was causal relationship between the acts of the accused persons and the
death of the deceased which is established by the evidences taken into consideration and
surrounding circumstances. Also, there was an agreement among the accused persons to kill the
deceased which was done in furtherance of common intention of all, thus all the essentials of the
said sections stipulated under I.P.C. are proved beyond reasonable doubt.
ARGUMENT - II
F.I.R. AND STATEMENTS MADE UNDER 161 OF

Cr.P.C. ARE VITAL
EVIDENCES AND AN ACCUSED CAN BE PUNISHED ON THE BASIS
OF THESE
EVIDENCES.
It is humbly contended before this Honble Court that F.I.R is vital piece of evidence.
Especially in matters involving criminal offences, F.I.R assumes a greater significance.
Statements made under 161 of Cr.P.C. can be used for purposes other than contradicting its
maker. Courts are given wide power under 165 of Cr.P.C. and it does not get impaired by
162 of the Cr.P.C. In the present matter, the courts have rightfully convicted the accused
persons on the basis of these evidences since they are supported by other evidences taken into
consideration.
XI | P a g e
TH
ARGUMENT-III
EXPERT OPINION IS AN IMPORTANT PIECE OF

EVIDNECE AND THE
ACCUSED CAN BE PUNISHED BASIS OF POST MORTEM REPORT.
Under 45, opinions of experts are relevant on questions of foreign law, science, art, identity,
handwriting or finger impressions. The help of experts is necessary when the question involved is
beyond the range of common experience or common knowledge or where the special study of a
subject or special training or skill or special experience is called for. There is nothing in the
Evidence Act or any other statute that stops the courts from acting on the basis of post mortem
report and an opinion which has been accepted by court becomes more important.
ARGUMENT IV
304B OF I.P.C. IS APPLICABLE.
It is humbly contended before this Honble court that the accused persons have been
rightfully convicted under 304B by the sessions court and this decision has been rightfully
upheld by the Honble High court considering the fact that death of the deceased was caused
by otherwise than normal circumstances, the death was occurred within 7 years of the
marriage, she was subject to cruelty and harassment by her husband and his relatives, the
cruelty and harassment was in connection to the dowry and the cruelty and harassment was
made soon before her death thus all the essentials of the said sections have been proved and a
presumption of Dowry can be raised under 113B of the Indian Evidence Act,1872.
XII | P a g e
TH
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
I. THE GIVEN GROUNDS ARE SUFFICIENT TO

DECIDE THE
GUILT OF ACCUSED.
It is humbly contended before this Honble Court that, Raghvendra Singh Shekhawat ,Dev Singh,
Yashodhra Devi, Nidhi Singh and Anita Singh (hereinafter to be referred as accused persons) are
guilty of offences under 302, 304B and 120B read with 34 of the INDIAN PENAL
CODE,1860 (hereinafter to be referred as I.P.C.) In the matter at hand, the accused persons have
been rightfully charged under these appropriate sections of I.P.C. by the Sessions Court and this
decision was rightfully upheld by Honble High Court and therefore, the brought before this
Honble Court, should be dismissed. The charge of Murder and Criminal Conspiracy read with
34 of I.P.C. will proved in the present Issue (ISSUE I.), the next issue
(ISSUE II.) will deal with evidentiary value of First Information Report (hereinafter to be
referred as F.I.R.) and statements made under 161 of CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973
(hereinafter to be referred as Cr.P.C.) and whether the accused persons can be punished only
on the basis of these evidences. The third issue (ISSUE III.) deals with the evidentiary value
of expert opinion and whether the accused persons can be punished on the basis of Post
Mortem report, and the Final issue (ISSUE IV.) deals with, whether 304B of I.P.C. is
applicable in the present case or not.
It is humbly submitted before this Honble Court that, the accused persons are guilty for
committing the offence of Murder of Gauri Singh (hereinafter to be referred as
victim/deceased) under 302 of I.P.C. [I.1. ] and criminal conspiracy under 120B read with
34 of I.P.C. [I.2.].
[I.1.] ACCUSED PERSONS ARE GUILTY OF MURDER AS PER

302 OF I.P.C.
302 of I.P.C. prescribes the punishment for committing the offence of Murder. In order to
bring a successful conviction under this charge, it is pertinent to refer to 300, IPC which
elucidates the essentials of Murder.
1
A person is guilty of Murder if he intentionally causes the death of a person or causes such
bodily injury as he knows, is likely to cause death of that person or causes such bodily injury
1
Sec 300, I.P.C.
Page | 1
TH
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
which in the ordinary course of nature results into death or commits an act so dangerous that
2
it must, in all probability cause death of that person .
It is contended, that in the present case, the accused persons had the intention to cause death
of the victim [I.1.A.] established by way of evidences, which prove that its a case of Murder
by poisoning. [I.1.B.] and by the victims call in distress, which formed a part of transaction in
the subject of inquiry, that is Principle of res gestae [I.1.C.]
Furthermore, the onus lies on the In-laws to show that they were not present at the place of
occurrence, that is the Plea of Alibi [I.1.D.] and to explain the death of the victim [I.1.E.]
coupled with the fact that, it is advisable for the trial code, to include 302 in all dowry death
cases [I.1.F.] and lastly that it is a case of homicide and not suicide [I.1.G.]
[I.1.A.] Intention to cause death.
Where intention to kill the deceased is established and medical evidence shows that injuries
caused by the accused were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death, the case
3
squarely falls under 302, of I.P.C. It is contended that, both mens rea [i] and actus reus [ii]
are established in the instant matter.
[i.] Mens Rea.

Intention to kill a person must be determined having regard to the factual scenario involved in
each case. Any fact is relevant which shows or constitutes a motive or preparation for any
4 5
relevant fact .In the present case, the following chain of events enunciates both, malafide
intention and motive of the accused persons
There was history of dowry demands and torture for girl child, to the victim and the
victim was not allowed to meet or talk to her parents.
Just before her death, the victim even called her sister to get help.
After the death of the victim, her parents were informed 15h later about the situation
and the accused persons tried to cremate the victim as soon as possible.
Hence, it is evident, that the accused persons had the requisite mens rea and the motive to
Murder the victim.
2
Sec 300, IPC.
3
State of Maharashtra v. Kalu Shivram Jagtap and Ors, 1980 Supp. SCC 224.
4
Benjamin v. State, (2008) 3 SCC 745.
5
See, Case Details, p.15.
2|Page
TH
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
[ii.] Actus Reus
To constitute a crime, the intent and act must concur. The intent to commit an offence is
6 7
followed by the act. In case of Sonali Mukherjee v. Union of India (UOI) , it was held by
the Honble Supreme Court that, injuries found on the cheek or mouth of the victim would
very significantly suggest forceful administration of pills and medical evidence will be looked
into, for that purpose.
In the present case, various injuries were found on the face and hands of the victim, by her
family members, and as per the Post Mortem report, these injuries, could have been inflicted
by some other person and the death of the victim was caused, due to intake of excessive
8
sleeping pills Hence, it is evident that the victim was forcefully given these pills by her in
laws and while resisting this forceful admiration she suffered these injuries
[I.1.B.] Murder by Poisoning.
It is contended that, the present case, is case of Murder by poisoning, considering the fact that,
sleeping pills can be equated with poison [A.] coupled with the fact that, four essential
9
circumstances, as held in the case of Bhupinder Singh v. State of Punjab , are proved so as to
justify the conviction of the offence of administering poison, and that are, motive of the accused
[B.], deceased died of the said administered poison [C.], accused had the poison in his possession
[D.] and accused had an opportunity to administer the poison to the deceased[E.].
[A.] Sleeping pills can be equated with poison.
The substance inflicting a toxic effect may be a drug or any chemical substance in the
environment of an individual. In fact every substance is theoretically capable of producing
10
toxicity and every drug is potentially a poison for routine purposes. Hence, it is evident that
sleeping pills can be easily equated with poison, in the present case.
[B.] Motive of the accused.
11
In case of, Rajamal v. State of T.N. , it was held by the Honble Court that, Motive is inherent in
dowry death cases and it plays a vital role in determining the guilt when only circumstantial
6
Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab, (1994) 3 SCC 569.
7
(2010) 15 SCC 25.
8
See, Case Details., p.19.
9
(1988) 3 SCC 513.
10
Modi, A Textbook of Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology, (24th Ed, 2011, p 3).
11
1993 CrLJ 3029 (Mad).
3|Page
TH
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
evidence is available. In the present case, as per the medical evidence, various injuries found
on the face and hands of the victim, could have been inflicted by some other person and death
was due to intake of excessive sleeping pills only. The contents of their malafide intentions
are mentioned above in detail, under contention [I.1.A.] and the same are not reproduced
herein again for the sake of brevity.
[C.] Deceased died of the said administered poison.
45, of the evidence act, identifies the opinion of a doctor or a medical practitioner as an
expert opinion and a report of Post Mortem is a valuable piece of information and it does not
12
require any formal proof. In the present case, as per the Post Mortem report, death was due
13
to the intake of excessive sleeping pills only, which shows that the deceased died of the said
administered poison.
[D.] Accused had poison in his possession.
A case of Murder by poison is almost one of secrecy; accuse watches his opportunity and
14
administers the poison in a manner calculated to avoid its detection. In the present case, as
per the Post Mortem report, death was only due to intake of excessive sleeping pills and
various injuries found on the body of the deceased by her family members, could have been
15
inflicted by some other person, which showed that the victim was forcefully given these
pills and in resistance suffered these injuries
[E.] Accused had an opportunity to administer poison to the deceased.
In criminal cases, all the circumstances of the case in every part of the conduct of the accused
16
may be taken into consideration for the purpose of showing the presence of crime and In
17
case of Krishan Lal v. Union of India , it was held that when a married woman is treated
with cruelty within the four walls of her matrimonial home, there is no likely hood of any
evidence. In the present case, injuries mentioned in the Post Mortem report clearly showed
that some other persons were also involved when this incident took place. Hence, it is evident
that, the accused persons had the opportunity to administer poison to the deceased.
12
Bhupinder Singh v State of Punjab, (1988) 3 SCC 513.
13
14
Anant Chintaman Lagu v. State of Bombay, AIR 1960 SC 500.
15
16
1 RAM JETHMALANI & D.S. CHOPRA, THE LAW OF EVIDENCE, p. 116 (1st Ed 2013).
17
1994 CrLJ 2472 (P&H).
4|Page
TH
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
Four essentials of administering poison proved above, it is humbly submitted that victim was
Murdered by poisoning.
[I.1.C.] Principle of Res Gestae is applicable.
6 of the INDIAN EVIENCE ACT, 1872 (hereinafter to be referred as the Evidence Act),
talks about res gestae, it says that if facts form part of transaction which is subject of inquiry,
then, manifestly evidence of them ought not to be excluded and 8 of the evidence act.,
embodies the rule that the testimony of res gestae is allowable when it goes to root of the
18
matter, concerning the commission of a crime.
19
In case of Rattan v. Reginam , a man was prosecuted for the Murdering his wife, there was
evidence to the effect that deceased telephoned, to get help, the call ended suddenly and when
the police came to house they found the body a of dead women. It was held that her call in
distress showed that, death was intentional and not accidental. Her call and words spoken
were relevant as a part of transaction which brought about her death.
In the present case, the victim also, called her sister to get help, her voice showed distress and
call ended suddenly, hence, the tone of the voice used showed intrinsically that the statement
was being forced from the deceased by an overwhelming pressure of a contemporary event
20
and it carried its own stamp of spontaneity
[I.1.D.] Plea of Alibi.
An Alibi is a legal maxim, for a claim of a piece of evidence that, one was elsewhere when an
21
alleged act took place. An Alibi is an excuse. It is a defence in a criminal prosecution.
According to 103 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872, the burden of proof lies on him and not on
22
the prosecution to prove the alibi
23
In case of Jitendra Kumar v. State of Haryana , it was held that, the plea of alibi in fact, is
required to be proved with such certainty so as to completely exclude the possibility of the
presence of the accused at the place of occurrence and in the house which was the home of
their relatives. In the present case, when a plea of alibi is raised by the accused persons,
18
STEPHEN, DIGEST OF EVIDENCE, Art.3.
19
(1971) 1 WLR 801.
20
21
Yusuf S. K. v. State, AIR 1954 Cal 258; State v. Sashibhushan, (1963) 1 CrLJ 550(Ori).
22
State of Haryana v. Sher Singh, AIR 1981 SC 1021; Dalel Singh v. Jag Mohan Singh, 1981 CrLJ 667(Del).
23
2012 CrLJ 3085.
5|Page
TH
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
Raghvendra and Dev Singh that, they were not present in the house and went to a park and
24
local akhara , respectively, at the morning of the occurrence of the death, then, it is for them
to establish the said plea by providing positive evidence, which has not been led in the present
case. Hence, the fact that they were not present at the premise, where the incident took place
is just a mere statement given by accused persons and an uncorroborated evidence of alibi
cannot be given any importance/weight.
[I.1.E.] Onus lies on the in laws to explain the death.
25
In case of Kundala Bala Subramanyam v. State of A.P. , the dowry death occurred in the in
laws place, the onus was laid on the inmates of the house to explain the circumstances of the
tragic end of the life of the married woman. In the present case, the appellant have failed to
produce any reasonable hypotheses or cogent evidence of any kind, which shows that it was a
case of suicide and not a case of homicide.
26
In case of State of Rajasthan v. Jaggu Ram , harassment for dowry was proved, there was
no satisfactory explanation for head injuries, the accused husband and his family members
cremated her without informing her parents or police. The court said that the conduct of the
accused clearly showed that he had done so with the sole object of concealing the real cause
of death. He was liable to be convicted. In the present case also, the in laws have not shown
any satisfactory explanation for the head injuries and for the fact that why were the parents of
the victim informed 15h late about the situation and even if the victim committed suicide,
why was the police not informed about the situation and there was also history of torture and
27
harassment for dowry to the victim.
Hence, from the above argument, it is evident that appellants had the intention to kill the
deceased.
[1.1.F.] It is advisable for the trial court to include 302 in all Dowry death cases.
28
In case of Rajbir v. State of Haryana , a two judge bench of the Honble Supreme Court
directed all the trial courts to consider adding 302 to the charge of 304B, so that the death
sentences can be imposed in such heinous and barbaric crimes against women. Hence, the
24
25
1993 AIR SCW 1321.
26
(2009) 15 SCC 292.
27
28
1985 CrLJ 1495.
6|Page
TH
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
inclusion of 302 of I.P.C., to the charge of 304B of I.P.C. by the sessions court in the
present case is justified and it is rightly upheld by the Honble High Court.
[I.1.G.] Not a case of suicide.
It is contended, that in the present case, the victim has not committed suicide considering the
fact that victim would not leave the child at the mercy of her in-laws [i.] coupled with the fact
that everything was done in a clandestine and secret manner [ii.]
[i.] Victim would not leave the child at the mercy of her in-laws.
29
In case of Baldev Krishan v. State of Haryana it was held by the Honble Supreme Court that,
the argument that, victim would have committed suicide will go against the appellants as It would
be difficult to believe that having regard to the ordinary course of human conduct and in
particular of mother, she would commit suicide and leave the child at the mercy of her in-law In
30
the present case, the victim also had a child of 11 months , it was very unlikely that she would
have committed suicide and would have left the child at the mercy of her in laws
[ii.] Everything was done in a clandestine and secret manner.
31
In case of State of Rajasthan v. Mahavir Prasad , the father of the deceased was informed
about the incident very late. It was held by the Supreme Court that if the victim had
committed suicide, there was no reason why the fact of death was communicated to the father
of the deceased so late. The whole attempt appears to be to suppress the fact of homicidal
death of victim from the relatives of the deceased. In the present case, the victims parents
were informed about the situation 15h later and the accused persons tried to do the cremation
32
as soon as possible.
ARGUENDO, just for the sake of argument, even if it is assumed that it was a case of suicide,
the police was not informed about the situation, which would have been done in ordinary
33
course of nature. In case of Dhian Singh v. State of Punjab , it was held that not informing
the police or family of the victim about the situation clearly showed that everything was done
in a clandestine and secret manner. Hence, the theory of suicide is doubtful.
29
AIR 1997 SC 1666.
30
31
1998 CrLJ 4064.
32
33
AIR 2005 SC1450.
7|Page
TH
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
[I.2.] ACCUSED PERSONS ARE GUILTY UNDER 120B OF I.P.C

READ WITH 34 OF I.P.C.
It is humbly contended before this Honble court that, the accused persons are guilty for
committing the offence of criminal conspiracy under 120B of I.P.C. [I.2.A.] which was
done in furtherance of common intention of all, dealt under 34 of I.P.C. [1.2.B.]
[I.2.A.] Accused persons are guilty for committing the offence of criminal conspiracy
under 120B of I.P.C.
Criminal Conspiracy, under 120A of I.P.C. is committed when two or more persons agree
34
to do or cause to be done an illegal act or legal act by illegal means. Offence of Criminal
35
Conspiracy is exception to general law where intent alone does not constitute crime .It is
contended that the accused persons had the agreement between them to commit an offence of
criminal conspiracy [i.] established by the intention [ii.] and lastly from the object of the
conspirators [iii.]
[i.] Agreement between the Conspirators.
It renders the mere agreement to commit an offence punishable, even if no offence takes place
36
pursuant to the illegal agreement. The unlawful agreement which amounts to conspiracy need
not be formal or express, but may be inherent in and inferred from the circumstances [a.],
37
especially from the conduct of the conspirators and the circumstantial evidence available. [b.]
[a.] Agreement of conspiracy is inferred from the circumstances.
The circumstances proved before, during and after the occurrence have to considered to
38
decide the complicity of the accused. In the present case, the in laws of the victim informed
the victims parents 15 h later after the death took place and also tried to cremate her, without
waiting for her parents to come, victim was not supposed to meet or talk to her parents and
39
there was also history of dowry demands and torture for girl child to the victim.
34
IV. NELSON R. A., INDIAN PENAL CODE, P. 2905, (10TH Ed. 2008).
35
State of T.N. through SP CBI/SIT v. Nalini, AIR 1999 SC 2640.
36
Yogesh v. State of Maharashtra, (2008) 10 SCC 394.
37
State of T.N. through SP CBI/SIT v. Nalini, AIR 1999 SC 2640.
38
RATANLAL & DHIRAJLAL, INDIAN PENAL CODE, p. 245 (33rd Ed. 2012).
39
8|Page
TH
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
[b.] Consistency with circumstantial evidences.

A conspiracy is hatched in secrecy, and executed in darkness, naturally; therefore, it is not
feasible for the prosecution to connect each isolated act or statement of one accused with the
acts or statements of the others, unless there is a common bond linking all of them
40
together. The help of circumstantial evidence is necessary as it becomes difficult to locate
41
any direct evidence in these cases
In the present case as per Post Mortem report, injuries found on the body of the victim by her
family members, could have been inflicted by some other person and death was due to
consumption of excessive sleeping pills, which can be equated with poison as explained in
contention [I.1.B.].
[ii.] Intention of the Conspirators.

The entire agreement must be viewed as a whole and it has to be ascertained what in fact the
42
conspirators intended to do. In the present case, the accused persons intended to Murder the
victim considering the fact that, as per the Post Mortem report, injuries found on the face and
hands of the victim by the family of the deceased, could have been inflicted by some other
person and the death was due to consumption of excessive sleeping pills coupled with the fact
43
that the victim also tried to call her sister, to get help, just before her death , this clearly
shows that there was forceful administration of these pills to the victim.
[iii.] Object of the Conspirators.

The object of the conspirators in the present case was to give it a colour of suicide, everyone
was a part of pre-planned conspiracy. This is evident from their conduct before, during and
44
after the occurrence of the incident. In the present case, the following chain of events
enunciates the object of the conspirators.
The in laws of the victim informed the victims parents about her the death 15 h later
and also tried to cremate her, without waiting for her parents to come.
40
M.S. Reddy v. State Inspector of Police ACB Nellore, 1993 CrLJ 558.
41
Bhagwan Das v. State of U.P., 1974 CrLJ 751.
42
Lennnart Schussler And Anr. V. Director of Enforcement And Anr, AIR 1970 SC 549.
43
44
Ibid.
9|Page
TH
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
Even if we assume it was a suicide, they did not inform the police about the death,
which should have been done in normal circumstances, as explained under Contention
[I.1.B.]
It is contended that, all the victims in mates left the house intentionally and kept the bottle of
sleeping pills beside the victim to show it as a case of suicide, in the present case, helping of
family members to the accused, clearly shows that they had the necessary knowledge and the
purpose of the object.
[I.2.B.] CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY WAS DONE IN

FURTHERANCE OF THE
COMMON INTENTION OF ALL, DEALT UNDER 34 OF I.P.C.
34 of I.P.C, lays down a principle of joint liability. It deals with doing of separate acts similar or
adverse by similar persons, if all are done in furtherance of common intention. In such situation
45
each person is liable for the result of the act as if he had done the act himself. Two ingredients
for the application of the section are common intention to commit a crime [i.] and participation by
46
all the accused in the act or acts in furtherance of this common intention. [ii.]
[i.] Common Intention to commit a crime.
If two or more persons intentionally do an act jointly, the position in law is just the same as if
47
each of them has done it individually by himself. Reason why all are deemed guilty is that
the presence of accomplice gives encouragement, support and protection to the person
48
actually committing an act. Common intention has to be judged and inferred by the part
played by all the accused [a.], nature of injuries inflicted to the victim [b.] and the
49
surrounding circumstances. [c.]
a) Part played by all the accused persons.

In the present case, after the death of the victim, her parents were informed 15h later about
the situation, the accused persons tried to cremate the victim as soon as possible and Even if
it is assumed that the victim committed suicide, just for the sake of argument, the in-laws did
not inform the police about the situation which would have been done in ordinary course of
nature as explained under contention [I.1.E].
45
Goddapa v. State of Karnataka, (2013) 3 SCC 675.
46
MSED Co. Ltd v. Dattar Ltd., (2010) 10 SCC 479.
47
Supra n.55.
48
RATANLAL & DHIRAJLAL, INDIAN PENAL CODE, p. 43 (33rd Ed. 2012).
49
Shangara v. State of Punjab , 1995 SCC (cri) 163.
10 | P a g e
TH
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
b) Nature of injuries inflicted on the victim.

In the present case, various injuries were found on the face and hands of the victim, by the
50
family of the deceased and as per the Post Mortem report, these injuries could have been
inflicted by some other person and lastly that the death of the victim was caused, due to
intake of poison, as explained under contention [I.1.B].
c) Surrounding circumstances.
In the present case, there was history of dowry demands and torture for girl child, to the
victim. The victim was not allowed to meet or talk to her parents and on the day of death, the
51
victim even tried to call her sister, for help, just before her death.
[ii.] Participation by all the accused persons in the act or acts in furtherance of the
Common Intention.
Once there exists common intention, mere presence of the accused persons among the assailants
52
would be sufficient prove of their participation in the offence. The participation need not in all
cases be by physical presence and culpability under 34 of I.P.C. cannot be excluded by mere
53
distance from the scene of occurrence. In the present case, not informing the parents of the
54
victim and the police about the situation clearly shows the support and encouragement to
commit crime by the family members to the accused husband of the victim. And Even if the
family members of the accused did nothing and stood outside the door, it is to be remembered that
55
in crimes as in other things those also serve who only stand and wait.
II. F.I.R. AND STATEMENTS MADE UNDER 161 OF Cr.P.C. ARE

VITAL EVIDENCES AND THE ACCUSED CAN BE PUNISHED
ON THE BASIS OF THESE EVIDENCES.
It is humbly contended before this Honble Court that, F.I.R is a vital piece of evidence
[II.1.], statements made under 161 of Cr.P.C. can be used for purposes other than
contradicting its maker [II.2.] and finally the accused can be punished on the basis of these
evidences, if they are supported by other evidences [II.3.].
50
51
52
Mrinal Das v. State of Tripura, (2011) 9 SCC 479.
53
Virendra Singh v. State of M.P., (2010) 8 SCC 407.
54
55
Lallan Rai v. State of Bihar, AIR 2003 SC 333.
11 | P a g e
TH
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
[II.1.] FIR IS A VITAL PIECE OF EVIDENCE.

Information given to a police officer and reduced to writing as required by the 154 of
Cr.P.C. is known as the First Information Report. The principal object of the First
Information Report from the point of view of the informant is to set the criminal law in
motion, and from the point of view of the investigating authority is to obtain information
about the alleged criminal activity so as to be able to take suitable steps to trace and book the
56
guilty. It is more important than any other statements recorded during the investigation.
F.I.R. can be used as a previous statement for the purpose of corroborating or contradicting
57
the maker under 145 and 157 of Cr.P.C. and for judging trustworthiness of the witness
From the viewpoint of the investigating authorities it conveys to them earliest information
regarding the circumstances in which the crime was committed; the names of the culprits and the
role played by them as well as the names of the witnesses present at the scene of occurrence, so it
58
is vital for effective and meaningful investigation. The courts give extra weightage to FIR in
criminal cases [II.1.A.] and promptness in lodging FIR is also taken into account.
[II.1.B]
[II.1.A.] Importance of F.I.R. in criminal cases.
It is humbly submitted before this Honble court that criminal courts attach great importance
to FIR in criminal cases and especially in Murder case, FIR is a vital and valuable piece of
59
evidence for the purpose of appreciating evidence led by prosecution at the trial . F.I.R. is
very vital material as it is the first information about the incident and has less chances of
60
altering the version and improvement. In case of Bathula Nagamalleswara Rao v. State
61
(represented by public prosecutor) it was held by the Honble Supreme Court that:
This Court in a series of judgments has repeatedly and consistently emphasized that first
information report in a criminal case is an extremely vital and valuable piece of evidence for
the purpose of corroborating the oral evidence adduced at the time of trial.
56
Jodha Khoda Rabari v. State of Gujrat, 1992 CrLJ 3298(Guj).
57
Kapil Singh v. State of Bihar, 1990 CrLJ 1248.
58
State of Maharashtra v. Ahmed Shaikh Babajan and Ors, (2009)14SCC 267.
59
Mehmood v. State of UP, (2007) 14 SCC 16.
60
Sujot Sen v. State of W.B., (2007) 6 SCC 32.
61
(2011) 11 SCC 722.
12 | P a g e
TH
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
It is contended that F.I.R. itself is not a proof of crime but is a piece of evidence which could be
62
used for corroborating the case of prosecution .Importance of FIR has been emphasized by
Honble Supreme Court in plethora of cases It is now a well settled position that FIR in criminal
matters is very valuable and vital evidence and its importance should not be underestimated. In
matter at hand charges framed upon the accused persons are 302, 304B and 120B read with
34 of the I.P.C., which are charges of very serious criminal gravity. In such a case, FIR assumes
extra importance as held by Supreme Court in various judgments.
[II.1.B.] Promptness in lodging F.I.R.
Courts while dealing with criminal matters give a great deal of importance to promptness of
lodging F.I.R., as the same substantially eliminates chances of embellishment and concoction
63
creeping into account contained therein. Prompt and early reporting of the occurrence by the
64
informant with all its vivid details gives an assurance regarding truth of his version. While
dealing with the importance of time taken to lodge FIR in case of Thulia Kali v. State of
65
T.N. , the Supreme Court held that:
Delay in lodging the first information report quite often results in embellishment which is a
creature of afterthought. On account of delay the report not only gets benefits of the
advantage of spontaneity, danger creeps in of the introduction of colored version,
exaggerated account or connected story as a result of deliberation and consultation.
It is most humbly submitted before this court that, in the instant case the fact that FIR was
lodged immediately after the father came to know about the incident, rules out the possibility
66
of embellishment or false implication of accused persons which in turn makes the story of
prosecution more reliable and trustworthy.
[II.2.] STATEMENTS RECORDED UNDER 161 OF CR.P.C. CAN BE USED FOR

PURPOSES OTHER THAN CONTRADICTION.
It is most respectfully contented that, in the process of investigation, under 161 of Cr.P.C, any
Police officer making an investigation is accredited and empowered to examine orally any
62
Jitendra Kumar v. State of Haryana, AIR 2012 SC 2488.
63
Brahm Swaroop v. State of UP, AIR 2011 SC 280.
64
State of UP v. Harban Sahai, 1998 SCC (cri) 1412.
65
(1972) 3 SCC 393.
66
Kirpal Singh v. State of UP, (2010) 3 SCC 347.
13 | P a g e
TH
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
person supposed to be acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case and to records
statement of witnesses. These statements are predominantly called as 161 Cr.P.C statements.
As per the 162 of the code, statements recorded by police by cannot be used for any other
purpose other than contradicting the witness but it was held in case of Raghunandan v. state
67
of U.P. that:
We are inclined to accept the argument of the appellant that the language of 162, Criminal
Procedure Code, though wide, is not explicit or specific enough to extend the prohibition to the
use of the wide and special powers of the Court to question a witness, expressly and explicitly
given by 165 of the Indian Evidence Act in order to secure the ends of justice. We think that a
narrow and restrictive construction put upon the prohibition in 162, Criminal Procedure Code,
so as to confine the ambit of it to the use of statements by witnesses by parties only to a
proceeding before the Court, would reconcile or harmonize the two provisions considered by us
and also serve the ends of justice. Therefore, we hold that 162, Criminal Procedure Code, does
not impair the special powers of the Court under 165, Indian Evidence Act.
Thus it can be inferred from the above mentioned judgment that 162 of the code does not
impair the powers of court given under 165 of the code therefore the court can use the
statements recorded under 161 for purposes other than contradicting the maker and power
of the court to put questions to the witness as envisaged in 165 of the Evidence Act would
be untrammeled by the interdict contained in 162 of the Code.
[II.3.] ACCUSED CAN BE PUNISHED ON THE BASIS OF THESE EVIDENCES.
It is most humbly submitted that accused can be punished on the basis of these evidences
considering the fact that, in the present case, FIR and statements recorded under 161 of
Cr.P.C. are supported by other evidences such as Post Mortem report [II.3.A.], call details
[II.3.B.] provided by sister of the deceased . Furthermore, the evidences of the relatives or
interested witnesses cannot be rejected in toto on the ground of their relation [II.3.C.]
coupled with the fact that, the chain of circumstantial evidence is complete [II.3.D.].
[II.3.A.] Post Mortem report.
As per the Post Mortem report, injuries found on the body of the deceased, by the family of the
victim, could have been by someone else, these injuries suggest that the pills might have been
67
AIR 1974 SC 463.
14 | P a g e
TH
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
68
forcefully administered and it was also stated in the Post Mortem report that the injuries
were inflicted 12h before the death of the victim which does not support the story of the
accused persons.
[II.3.B.] Call details.
The call details submitted by Mamta, the sister of the deceased shows that Gauri was alive till
7.45 AM which clearly contradicts the story of accused persons Call detail is admissible
evidence as per 65B of the evidence Act. It was not suggested that there was any
manipulation or material deficiency in the computer (mobile phone in this case). It would be
legitimate to draw a conclusion that the system was functional and output was produced by
69
computer in regular use. Hence, the evidence cannot be rejected.
[II.3.C.] The evidences of the relatives or interested witnesses cannot be rejected in Toto
on the ground of their relation.
70
In case of L.K. Nayak v. State of Chhattisgarh , it was held that, in matrimonial offences like
dowry death, the court are required to be more cautious and required to pay more attention in the
trail of the cases , appreciation and marshaling of evidence, especially in light of circumstances
which normally do not permit the parents of the bride or the bride to react and to respond to report
the matter to the police or the other authorities or to member of community unless they are
compelled to do so or circumstances become beyond their tolerance. Evidence of interested
witness or relatives cannot be rejected in Toto on the ground of their relation.
Hence, it is evident that, in the present case, the victims family was compelled to take the
necessary steps, so their evidences should not be rejected in Toto on the ground of their relation.
[II.3.D.] The chain of circumstantial evidence is complete.
Circumstantial in the evidence in the context means a combination of facts creating a network
through which there is no escape for the accused, because the facts taken as a whole do not admit
71
of any inference but of his guilt In the present case, the post mortem report, call details,
surrounding circumstances present before and after the death of the victim and other evidences
form a chain so complete, that it points directly towards the guilt of the accused persons. Hence,
the conviction of accused persons was not only on the basis of F.I.R and the statements
68
Sonali Mukherjee v. Union of India (2010) 15 SCC 25.
69
NCT of Delhi v. Navjot Sandhu, (2005) 11 SCC 600.
70
2013 CrLJ 1792 (Chh.).
71
Anant Chintaman Lagu v.State of Bombay, AIR 1960 SC 500.
15 | P a g e
TH
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
given under 161 of Cr.P.C., it was also supported by other evidences and therefore the
conviction of the accused persons is justified.
III. EXPERT OPINION IS IMPORTANT PIECE OF EVIDNECE

AND
AN ACCUSED CAN BE PUNISHED BASIS OF POST MORTEM
REPORT.
Under 45 of I.E.A, opinions of experts are relevant on questions of foreign law, science, art,
identity, handwriting or finger impressions. The help of experts is necessary when the
question involved is beyond the range of common experience or common knowledge or
where the special study of a subject or special training or skill or special experience is called
72
for. It is humbly contended that, in cases where science is involved, highly specialized
73
experts role cannot be disputed [III.1.] and the Post Mortem report helps the court to arrive
74
at a conclusion . [III.2.]
[III.1.] EVIDENTIARY VALUE OF EXPERT OPNION.
As per 45 of the evidence act., an expert witness is one who had devoted time and study to
special branch of learning and thus is specially skilled on those points on which he is asked to
75
state his opinion. His evidence on such points is admissible to enable the court to come to
76 77
conclusion. In case of Ramesh Chandra Argrwal v. Regency Hotel it was held by the
Supreme Court that:
The scientific question involved is assumed to be not within the court's knowledge. Thus
cases where the science involved, is highly specialised and perhaps even esoteric, the central
role of an expert cannot be disputed.
Thus, an expert plays a vital role where a question related to science is to be settled
Analyzing the aforementioned judgments, it can be validly inferred that an expert plays very
important role in assisting the court in arriving at a conclusion. Although the ultimate opinion
has to be formed by the court but an experts opinion has a very important role to play in
forming such opinion. An 'expert' report, duly proved, has its evidentiary value but such
72
73
Ramesh Chandra Argrwal v. Regency Hotel, (2009) 3 SCC (civ) 40.
74
Malay Kumar Ganguly v. Dr. Sukuma Mukherjee, (2009) 9 SCC 221.
75
Ibid.
76
Powell, 10th Ed. p. 39.
77
(2009) 3 SCC (civ) 40.
16 | P a g e
TH
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
appreciation has to be within the limitations prescribed and with careful examination by the
court. The court is expected to analyze the report, read it in conjunction with the other
evidence on record and then form its final opinion' as to whether such report is worthy of
78
reliance or not. The evidentiary value of expert opinion depends on the facts upon which it
is based and also the validity of the process by which the conclusion reached. Thus, the idea
that is proposed in its crux means that the importance of an opinion of an expert is decided on
the basis of the credibility of the expert and the relevant facts supporting the opinion so that
79
its accuracy can be cross checked.
[III.2.] ACCUSED PERSONS CAN BE PUNISHED ON THE BASIS

OF POST
MORTEM REPORT.
It is humbly contended before this Honble court that, the accused persons can be convicted
on the basis of Post Mortem report considering the fact that, when medical evidence totally
improbabilises the ocular testimony, than that is a relevant factor in evaluating that testimony
[III.2.A.] and when expert opinion is convincing, uncorroborated testimony of an expert may
be accepted by the court [III.2.B.] coupled with the fact that when such an opinion is
accepted by the court that it assumes great significance [III.2.C.]
[III.2.A.] Medical evidence vis--vis ocular evidence.
80
In case of Bhajan Singh v. State of Haryana , it was held by the Honble Supreme Court that
when medical evidence totally improbabilises the ocular testimony then that becomes a
relevant factor in the process of evaluation of evidence. In the matter at hand it could be seen
that as per the Post Mortem report, the bruises on the body of the deceased were caused 12
hours before her death, which totally improbablises the story of the accused husband. Thus,
medical evidence in this case has assumed a greater significance.
[III.2.B.] When expert opinion is convincing, uncorroborated testimony of an expert

may be accepted by the court.
In cases where reasons of opinion are convincing and there is no reliable evidence through a
81
doubt, the uncorroborated testimony of an expert may be accepted Expert testimony is made
78
Dayal Singh v. State of Uttranchal, AIR 2012 SC 3046.
79
80
AIR 2011 SC 2552.
81
17 | P a g e
TH
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
relevant by 45 of the Evidence and there is nothing in the Evidence Act, which justifies the
Court assuming that an expert's opinion is unworthy of credit unless corroborated.
The Evidence Act itself ( 3) tells that fact Court said to be provided when, after considering
the matters before it, the court either believes it to exist or considers its existence so probable
that prudent man ought, under the circumstances of the particular case, upon the supposition
that it exists Further, under 144 of the Evidence Act, the Court may presume the existence
of any fact which it thinks likely to have happened, regard being had to the common course of
natural events, human conduct, and public and private business, in their relation to facts of the
82
particular case. In the present case, the only reliable evidence is the Post Mortem report and
that directly points toward the guilt of the accused persons
[III.2.C.] When an opinion is accepted by the court, it assumes great significance.
83
In case of Hari Narayan Singh v. State of W.B , it was held that when an opinion is
accepted by the court it assumes considerable significance as corroborative value of
substantive evidence. It is humbly submitted, that in the present case, the expert opinion was
accepted by both the lower courts and thus it has become more important.
Hence, the appeal brought before this Honble Court should be dismissed
IV. 304B OF I.P.C. IS APPLICABLE.
304B of I.P.C. talks about dowry death. For establishing a charge of dowry death under this
84
section, the prosecution must prove the following elements, beyond reasonable doubt
1. The death of a woman should be caused by burns or bodily injury or otherwise than
under normal circumstances [IV.1.]
2. Such death should have occurred within seven year of her marriage, [IV.2.]
3. She must have been subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative
of her husband. [IV.3.]
4. Such cruelty or harassment should be for or in connection with demand for dowry.
[IV.4.]
82
83
2009 SCC OnLine Cal 1206.
84
RATANLAL & DHIRAJLAL, INDIAN PENAL CODE, p. 835 ( 33rd Ed. 2012).
18 | P a g e
TH
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
5. It should be established that such cruelty and harassment was made soon before her
85
death [IV.5.]
It is humbly contended before this Honble court that, the accused persons have been
rightfully convicted under 304B of I.P.C. by the Sessions Court and this decision has been
rightfully upheld by the Honble High Court considering the fact that, a presumption of
Dowry death can be raised under Sec 113B of the evidence act.[IV.6]
[IV.1.] THE DEATH OF A WOMAN SHOULD BE CAUSED BY BURNS

OR
BODILY INJURY OR OTHERWISE THAN UNDER NORMAL
CIRCUMSTANCES.
The expression 'otherwise than under normal circumstance' would mean death not in the usual
86
course but apparently under suspicious circumstances, if not caused by burns or bodily injury.
87
An unnatural death may be suicidal, homicidal or accidental. Hence, in the present case,
this section is applicable, irrespective of the fact, whether death was homicidal or suicidal.
[IV.2.] SUCH DEATH SHOULD HAVE OCCURRED WITHIN SEVEN

YEAR OF
HER MARRIAGE.
In the present case, the marriage was performed on 01.01.2013 and the incident occurred on
88
20.02.2015.
[IV.3.] VICTIM WAS SUBJECTED TO CRUELTY OR HARASSMENT

BY HER
HUSBAND OR BY ANY RELATIVE OF HER HUSBAND.
Cruelty has been defined in 498A of I.P.C which shall have the same meaning for 304B of
I.P.C Cruelty means:-
a. Any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit
suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical)
of the woman; or
b. harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any
person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable Surity is on
85
Sec. 304B, I.P.C.
86
Satvir Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 2001 SC 2828.
87
Rajiv Jassi v. State of Himachal Pradesh, (2004) SCC Online 112 (HP).
88
19 | P a g e
TH
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
account of failure by her or any person related to her or any person related to her to meet
89
such demand .
It is contended that, in the present case, the victim was subjected to cruelty, considering the
fact that, various injuries were found on the body of the deceased [IV.3.A.], and this cruelty
was also evident from, the reluctance of the victim to go to her matrimonial home [IV.3.B.]
not allowing the victim to meet or talk to her family members [IV.3.C.] and also from the
reluctance of the in laws of the victim in accepting the girl child. [IV.3.D.]
[IV.3.A.] Injuries were found on the body of the deceased.
90
In case of Girdhar Shankar v. State of Maharashtra , it was held that, although there is
absence of 'physical' injury in the definition of cruelty, as the legislature thought that it was fit
to include only coercive harassment which would obviously, as the legislative intent
expressed, is equally heinous to match the physical injury. In the present case, as per the Post
Mortem report, injuries seen by the victims family on the body of the deceased could have
been inflicted by someone else and the death was due to consumption of excessive sleeping
pills coupled with the fact that the victim even tried to call her sister, for help, just before the
91
death.
[IV.3.B.] Reluctance to go to her matrimonial home.
92
In case of Deen Dayal v. State of U.P. , it was held that the reluctance of the victim to go to
her matrimonial house was the direct and positive evidence of her being subjected to
harassment. There was nothing on record to show that after she had gone to her matrimonial
home merely two months later, situation radically changed. Hence, it became established that,
in connection with demand for dowry the deceased was subjected to cruelty which was the
proximate cause of her homicidal death and the appellants are rightly convicted under
304B. of I.P.C, in the present case, the victim showed reluctance to go to her matrimonial and
93
there is history of dowry demands and torture to the victim by the husbands family. So it is
evident that the victim was subjected to cruelty by her husband and her in-laws.
89
Sec 498A I.P.C.
90
AIR 2002 SC 2078.
91
92
(2009) 11 SCC 157.
93
20 | P a g e
TH
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
[IV.3.C.] Not allowing to meet or talk to the family members.
94
In case of Anand Kumar v. State of M.P. , the victim, married woman was not allowed to
meet or talk to her family members. It was held by the Honble Court that, this amounted to
cruelty. In this case death was due to the consumption of poison and the accused was held
guilty. In the present case the victim was also not allowed to meet or talk to her family
members and even if she did she was never happy. All her mediums of socialisation were
blocked and all this showed that victim was continuously subjected to cruelty.
[IV.3.D.] Not accepting the Girl child.
95
In State of Karnataka v. Ballappa , it was held by the Honble Court that, the conduct of the
accused husband and his family members in not accepting the baby girl was held as
amounting to cruelty to the wife. In the present case, also the victim was not allowed to enter
home because she gave birth to a girl child and no one from her in-laws came to see or meet
her in the hospital when she was admitted during her pregnancy.
[IV.4.] SUCH CRUELTY OR HARASSMENT SHOULD BE FOR OR IN

CONNECTION WITH THE DEMAND OF DOWRY.
It is contended that, the victim was subjected to cruelty in connection with demand of dowry
considering the fact that anything offending at any point of time is considered as dowry
[IV.4.A.] demand of Dowry, in the present case, was in connection with marriage [IV.4.B] and
96
absence of allegations of unlawful demand of dowry are no ground to quash the complaint.
[IV.4.C.] coupled with the fact that, onus cast on the prosecution would stand satisfied on the
anvil of a mere pre ponderance of probability [IV.4.D.]
[IV.4.A.] Anything offending at any point of time is Dowry.
The expression in connection with marriage cannot be given a restricted or narrower meaning
which means that, anything which is offending at any point of time i.e. at before or after the
97
marriage, would be covered under this section. This was introduced by amending act 63 of
1984, made with intention to cover all demands. In the present case, demand of Rupees 20 lakh
was made by the victims in-laws from the family of the deceased and the deceaseds family
94
(2009) 3 SCC 799.
95
1999 CrLJ 3064 (kant.).
96
S.Tripat Patra v. State of Orissa, 2003 CrLJ 1591.
97
Ashok Kumar v. State of Haryana, (2010) 12 SCC 350.
21 | P a g e
TH
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
fulfilled this demand by selling their ancestral property and it is very logical, that nobody in
the ordinary circumstance will be willing to sell this property.
[IV.4.B.] Dowry was in connection with marriage.
98
In case of M. Narayan v. state of Karnataka , it was held that, demand of dowry at, before
or at any time after the marriage, which is reasonably connected to the death of a married
woman, would necessarily be with or in relation to the marriage, unless the facts of a given
case clearly and unequivocally point otherwise In the present case, there was demand of
Rupees 20 lakh made by the accused persons, these demands continued and again a demand
of motorcycle was made by them. The victim in the present case was subjected to cruelty
right up to the point of death of the deceased, which was evident from, not allowing the
victim to meet or talk to her family, torturing her for giving birth to a girl child, and this was
also evident from victims reluctance to go to her matrimonial home, which was the direct
and positive evidence of her being subjected to cruelty, but most importantly from the fact
that various injuries were inflicted upon the victim, soon before her death.
99
In case of Devi Lal v. State of Rajasthan , there was proof of dowry demand and also
cruelty and harassment persisted. It persisted even when the victim went to her parents for
delivery purposes. It was resumed when she came back with a baby in her lap when her father
came to see her she was no longer there and was already cremated. The Supreme Court held
that conviction under the section called for no interference. Hence, from the above arguments,
it is evident that the accused persons have been rightfully convicted under 304B by the
sessions court and rightfully upheld by the Honble High court
[IV.4.C.] Absence of allegations of unlawful demand of Dowry is no ground to quash the

complaint.
100
In the case of S.Tripath Patra v. State of Odisha , the Honble court said, that the absence of
allegations of unlawful demand of property would not be a set back to the complaint. The court
found that, if the materials and other documents submitted during investigation disclosed the
ingredients of the offence to the prima facie extent then the complaint was not to be
98
(2015) 6 SCC 465.
99
(2007) 14 SCC 176.
100
2003 CrLJ 1591.
22 | P a g e
TH
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
quashed. In the present case, no allegation of demand of dowry was made by the victims
101
family to her in-laws because they hoped that sooner or later everything will get better.
[IV.4.D.] Onus cast on the prosecution would stand satisfied on the anvil of a mere
preponderance of probability.
102
In case of V. K .Mishra v. State of Uttarakhand , it was held by the Honble Supreme
Court that, use of word shown instead of proved in 304B of I.P.C, indicates that onus cast
on the prosecution would stand satisfied on the anvil of a mere preponderance of probability.
In other words shown will have to be read up to mean proved but only to the extent of
preponderance of probability, thereafter, the word deemed used in this section is to be read
down to require an accused to prove his innocence, but beyond reasonable doubt. In the
present case, the appellants have failed entirely to prove their innocence beyond reasonable
doubt, which is required under this section hence, the appeal brought before this Honble
court should be dismissed.
[IV.5.] SUCH CRUELTY AND HARASSMENT WAS MADE SOON BEFORE HER
DEATH.
The expression soon before her death cannot be given a restricted or narrower meaning because
these are the provisions of human behaviour and they cannot be given a narrower meaning, as it
would defeat the very purpose of this section. No hard and fast rule can be laid down by
103
prescribing a time limit. Accordingly, period which can come soon before her death is to be
104
determined by the courts depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case.
In the present case the test of soon before is satisfied from surrounding facts and circumstances
[IV.5.A.] and from medical evidence available [IV.5.B.]
[IV.5.A.] Surrounding facts and circumstances.
105
In the present case, it can be seen that there was a history of dowry demands and torture for
girl child to the victim and the victim was not allowed to meet or talk to her parents and on the
day of death, the victim, tried to call her sister, for help, just before her death. Finally after the
101
See, Case Detail.
102
(2015) 9 SCC 588.
103
Supra n. 116.
104
Keshab Chanda Panda v. State of Orissa, (1995) 1 CrLJ 174 (Ori.).
105
23 | P a g e
TH
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
death of the victim, her parents were informed 15 hours later about the situation and the
accused persons tried to cremate the victim, as soon as possible
[IV.5.B.] Corroboration with Medical Evidence.
106
In case of Krishan Lal v. Union of India , it was held by the Honble Court that, when a
married woman is treated with cruelty within the four walls of her matrimonial home, there is
no likely hood of any evidence and the court has to rely upon the circumstantial evidence to
convict the accused persons. In the present case, various injuries were found on the face and
hands of the victim, by the family of the deceased and as per Post Mortem report, these
injuries could have been inflicted by some other person, death of the victim was caused due to
107
intake of excessive sleeping pills , therefore all this, clearly showed that there was a
forceful administration of poison to the victim
[IV.6.] PRESUMPTION OF DOWRY DEATH UNDER 113B OF

EVIDENCE ACT.
When the question at Issue is whether a person is guilty of dowry death of a women and the
evidence discloses that immediately before her death she was subjected by such person to
cruelty and/or harassment for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, 113B, provides
108
that the Court shall presume that such person had caused dowry death.
It is contended, before this Honble Court that, in the present case, a presumption of dowry
death can be raised under 113B of I.E.A considering the fact that all the essentials of 304B
of I.P.C have been fulfilled [IV.6.A.], concept of deeming fiction is applicable to the
provisions of 304B of I.P.C. [IV.6.B.] coupled with the fact that legislative intent behind the
section 304B /of I.P.C and 113B of I.E.A cannot be ignored [IV.6.C.]
[IV.6.A.] All the essentials of 304B of I.P.C have been fulfilled.
All the essentials have been proved in the present case, under the appropriate contentions and the
same are not repeated here, for the sake of brevity. And In case of Baldev Singh v. State of
109
Punjab , demand of dowry and torture was present, death was due to poisoning in abnormal
circumstances, presumption of dowry death not rebutted sufficiently. Conviction was held to be
proper. In the present case, the parents of the victim were informed 15 hours later after the death
of the victim and the in laws tried to do the cremation as soon as possible. Hence, it is
106
1994 CrLJ 2472 (P&H).
107
108
Bakshish Ram v. State of Punjab AIR 2013 SC 1484.
109
(2008) 13 SCC 233.
24 | P a g e
TH
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
evident that the presumption of dowry death by the sessions court was justified and this
decision was rightly upheld by the Honble High Court.
[IV.6.B.] Concept of Deeming Fiction is applicable to the provisions of 304B of I.P.C.
By deeming fiction in law the onus shifts on the accused to prove as to how the deceased
died. It is for the accused to show that the death of the deceased did not result from any
cruelty or demand of dowry by the accused persons the court has to presume that the
appellant has committed the offence under S 304 B. It is therefore for the appellant to
110
sufficiently rebut this presumption. In the present case, the Appellants have failed entirely
to produce any cogent or substantial evidence which leads to the fact that death of the
deceased did not result from any cruelty or demand of dowry. Hence, the appeal brought
before this Honble court should be dismissed.
[IV.6.C.] Legislative intent behind 304B of I.P.C. and 113B of the Evidence Act.
111
In case of Kunia Abdullah v. State of Kerala it was very clearly stated by the Honble
Supreme Court that, the legislative intent behind 304B of I.P.C and 113B of I.E.A was to
encounter the difficulties of proof by creating a presumption of dowry death. And the same
112
was reiterated, in case of Bakshish Ram And Anr. v. State of Punjab , it was stated by the
Honble court that Intention of the legislature behind these section is to fasten the guilt on the
husband or in laws though they did not in fact cause the death. Hence, not applying the provisions
of 304B of I.P.C. in the present case would entirely defeat the intent of legislature.
110
P.H. Basha v. State of AP, 2012 CrLJ 4230.
111
AIR 2004 SC 1731.
112
AIR 2013 SC 1484.
25 | P a g e
TH
CONCLUSION
In instant matter, the accused persons have been convicted by Sessions Court under 302,
304B, 120B read with 34 of the I.P.C. and same has been upheld by Honble High Court of
Rajasthan. It is most humbly submitted that the decision of both the courts is justified
considering the fact that, all the essentials of Murder and Dowry death laid down under 300
and 304B of I.P.C. have been duly met. The offence of Criminal conspiracy done in
furtherance of common intention has also been established. The reliance of the courts on
evidences like F.I.R., statements recorded under 161 of Cr.P.C. and Expert opinion, which
are vital evidences in cases involving offences like Murder and Dowry death which are often
done behind the four walls in utmost secrecy and there is rarely any direct evidence available,
is also justified. The events which took place one after the other and the evidences taken into
consideration form a chain so complete that it points to only one hypothesis that is, the guilt
of the accused persons. As, Held by Supreme Court in plethora of cases, Dowry death is a
social evil that has been a part of our society since centuries and keeping in mind the intent of
legislature behind 304B which was to eliminate this evil, stringent punishment should be
given to those who are found guilty of this heinous crime. Therefore, this provision must be
given a fair, pragmatic and commonsensical interpretation so as to fulfil the object sought to
113
be achieved by Parliament. The role of courts, under these circumstances assumes greater
importance and it is expected that the courts would deal with such cases in a more realistic
manner and not allow the criminals to escape on account of procedural technicalities or
insignificant lacunae in the evidence as otherwise the criminals would receive encouragement
and the victims of crime would be totally discouraged by the crime going unpunished. The
114
courts are expected to be sensitive in cases involving crime against women. Hence the
appeal brought before this court should be dismissed.
113
Rajinder Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 2015 SC 1359.
114
Kundula Bala Subhramanyan v. State of A.P. (1993) 2 SCC 684.
XIII | P a g e
TH
PRAYER
In the light of the Issues raised, arguments advanced and authorities cited, may this Honble
Court be pleased to:
1. To dismiss the appeal.
2. To uphold conviction of the accused persons for committing offences under 302,
304B and 120B read with 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.
3. To award death penalty to the accused persons for their heinous crimes.
And/or
Pass any other order as it deems fit in the interest of equity, justice and good conscience.
All of which is humbly and respectfully submitted.
COUNSEL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT
PLACE NEW DELHI

DATE - / /2017
XIV | P a g e

Amity Moot Respondent

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Amity Moot Respondent

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

TH

4 AMITY MOOT COURT COMETITION, 2017

BEFORE THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

RAGHAVENDRA SINGH SHEKHAWAT & ORS.

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT

MEMORANDUM ON BEFALF OF RESPONDENT

III LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS....

[I.] THE ABOVE GROUNDS ARE SUFFICIENT TO DECIDE THE

[I.1.] ACCUSED PERSONS ARE GUILTY OF MURDER AS PER 302 OF I.P.C...1

[II.] FIR AND STATEMENTS MADE UNDER 161 OF Cr.P.C.

[II.1.] FIR IS A VITAL PIECE OF EVIDENCE ....12

[III.2.] STATEMENTS RECORDED UNDER 161 OF CR.P.C. CAN BE USED FOR

[III.] EXPERT OPINION IS IMPORTANT PIECE OF EVIDNECE

[III.2.] ACCUSED PERSONS CAN BE PUNISHED ON THE BASIS OF POST

MEMORANDUM ON BEFALF OF RESPONDENT

[IV.] 304B OF I.P.C IS APPLICABLE....

[IV.1.] THE DEATH OF A WOMAN SHOULD BE CAUSED BY BURNS OR BODILY

[IV.2.] SUCH DEATH SHOULD HAVE OCCURRED WITHIN SEVEN YEAR OF

[IV.3.] VICTIM WAS SUBJECTED TO CRUELTY OR HARASSMENT BY HER

[IV.4.] SUCH CRUELTY OR HARASSMENT SHOULD BE FOR OR IN CONNECTION

[IV.6.] PRESUMPTION OF DOWRY DEATH CAN BE RAISED UNDER 113B OF

S. no. Name of the Case Citation

27. K. Hassem v. State of T.N.. 2005 CrLJ 143.

57. State HP v Jai Chand. (2013) 10 SCC 298.

1. The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

AIR All India Reporter

All Allahabad High Court

Cal Calcutta High Court

Cri LJ / Cr LJ Criminal Law Journal

Cr.P.C. Code of Criminal Procedure

Guj Gujarat High Court

Mad Madras High Court

Ori Orissa High Court

Pat Patna High Court

Raj Rajasthan High Court

SCJ Supreme Court Journal

SCR Supreme Court Reporter

POST MORTEM REPORT

I. WHETHER THE GIVEN GROUNDS ARE SUFFICIENT TO

II. WHAT IS THE EVIDENTIARY VALUE OF F.I.R. AND

III. WHAT IS THE EVIDENTIARY VALUE OF EXPERT

IV. WHETHER 304B OF I.P.C IS APPLICABLE OR NOT?

THE GIVEN GROUNDS ARE SUFFICIENT TO

F.I.R. AND STATEMENTS MADE UNDER 161 OF

EXPERT OPINION IS AN IMPORTANT PIECE OF

304B OF I.P.C. IS APPLICABLE.

I. THE GIVEN GROUNDS ARE SUFFICIENT TO

[I.1.] ACCUSED PERSONS ARE GUILTY OF MURDER AS PER

[I.1.A.] Intention to cause death.

[i.] Mens Rea.

[ii.] Actus Reus

[I.1.B.] Murder by Poisoning.

[A.] Sleeping pills can be equated with poison.

[B.] Motive of the accused.

[C.] Deceased died of the said administered poison.

[D.] Accused had poison in his possession.

[E.] Accused had an opportunity to administer poison to the deceased.

[I.1.C.] Principle of Res Gestae is applicable.

[I.1.D.] Plea of Alibi.

[I.1.E.] Onus lies on the in laws to explain the death.

[I.1.G.] Not a case of suicide.

[ii.] Everything was done in a clandestine and secret manner.

[I.2.] ACCUSED PERSONS ARE GUILTY UNDER 120B OF I.P.C