RAJBIR @ RAJU AND ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

                   [2010] 13 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 886


A                   RAJBIR @ RAJU AND ANR.
                                   v.
                        STATE OF HARYANA
                   (S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 9507 of 2010)
                       NOVEMBER 22, 2010.
B
    [MARKANDEY KATJU AND GYAN SUDHA MISRA, JJ.)

        PENAL CODE, 1860:

c       s. 304-8 - Conviction of accused-husband and mother-
    in-law by trial court - Husband sentenced to imprisonment for
    life and mother-in-law to 2 years RI - High Court reducing
    sentence of husband to 10 years RI -Appeal by accused -
    Held: It appears to be a case of barbaric and brutal murder -
0   Injuries sustained by the deceased prima facie indicate that
    her head was repeatedly struck and she was a/so throttled -
    Notice to issue to accused-husband why his sentence be not
    enhanced to life sentence as awarded by trial court -
    Administration of criminal justice - Sentence/sentencing.

E       ADMINISTRATION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE:

         Framing of charge - Directions given to all trial courts in
    the country, ordinarily, to add s. 302 /PC to the charge of s.
    304-8 /PC so that death sentences can be imposed in such
F   heinous and barbaric crimes against women - Penal Code,
    1860 - ss. 304-8 and 302 /PC - Sentence/sentencing -
    Enhancement of sentence.

      Satya Narayan Tiwari@ Jolly & Anr. vs. State of UP.
G [2010) 12 SCR 1137, relied on.
                          Case Law Reference:
        [201 OJ 12 SCR 1137        relied on             para 5


H                                 886
 RAJBIR @ RAJU AND ANR. v. STATE OF HARYANA 887


    CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: SLP (CRL.) No.                A
9507 of 2010.

    From the Judgment & Order dated 21.01.2010 of the High
Court of Punj~b & Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal
No. 505 of 2001.
                                                                   B
    A .. P. Mohanty for the Petitioners.

    The following Order of the Court was delivered

                              ORDER
                                                                   c
    1. Delay of 158 days in filing the special leave petition is
condoned.

      2. The petitioner No.1 Rajbir (husband) was found guilty
of murdering his pregnant wife Sunita for demanding cash           D
amount barely 6 months after their marriage. He was awarded
life sentence under Section 304 B, IPC, apart from sentences
under other sections. The Punjab & Haryana High Court has
reduced the sentence to 10 years rigorous imprisonment.
Petitioner No.2 (mother of Rajbir) was awarded two years           E
rigorous imprisonment.

    3. We fail to see why the High Court has reduced the
sentence of petitioner No.1 Rajbir. It appears to be a case of
barbaric and brutal murder. This is borne out by the injuries,
which are in the evidence of Doctor, PW 2, whcih are as follows:   F

    "1. A diffused contusion radish in colour on right side of
    face extending between left half of both lips and upto right
    pinna.

    And from the zygomatic area to right angle man~ible. On        G
    dis-section underline tissue was found Ecchymose.

    2. On right side of neck, a diffused contusion 3.5 cm x 2.5
    cm situated, 2.5 cm posterior inferior to right angle of
                                                                   H
     888     SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010) 13 (ADDL.) S.C.R.


A          mandible. On dis-section undelying area was Ecchmosed.

           3. A contusion size of 7.5 cm x 5 cm over left side of neck
           just below angle of mandible. Underlying area on
           dissection was Ecchymeseed.
B          4. Multiple reddish contusion of various sizes from 0.5 cm
           x 0.5 cm to 1 cm to 1 cm x 0.5 cm on both lips including
           an area of 6 x 4 ems. On dissection, underlying area was
           Ecchymesed.

c          5. A laceration of size of 1.5 cm x 1 cm present inside the
           lower lip corresponding to lower incisor tooth and all of the
           neck on both sides below thyroid bone was· found
           Echhymesed on dis-section.

                 Scalp and skull were healthy. Uterus contained a
D          male foetus of four months.

                 Cause of death in our opinion was due to smothering
        - and throttling which was ante-mortem in nature and was
          sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature."
E
          4. The above injuries, prima facie, indicate that the
     deceased Sunita's head was repeatedly struck and she was
     also throttled.

         5. We have recently held in the case of Satya Narayan
 F   Tiwari@ Jolly & Another vs. State of UP., Criminal Appeal
     No. 1168 of 2005 decided on 28th October, 2010 that this
     Court is going to take a serious view in the matters of crimes
     against women and give harsh punishment.

G          6. This view was reiterated by us in another special leave
     petition in the case of Sukhdev Singh & Another vs. State of
     Punjab and we issued notice to the petitioner as to why his life
     sentence be not enhanced to death sentence.

           7. Issue notice to petitioner No.1 why his sentence be not
-H
RAJBIR @ RAJU AND ANR. v. STATE OF HARYANA 889


enhanced to life sentence as awarded by the trial Court.                A

      8. As regards petitioner No. 2 (Mother of petitioner No. 1),
it is alleged that: she is about 80 years of age.

       9. Issue notice to the respondent-State retarding petitioner
No.2.                                                                   B
       10. In the meantime, petitioner No. 2 only is ordered to be
released on bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court in connection
with case arising from FIR No. 279 of 1998 dated 4.9.1998,
P.S. Sadar Rohtak.                                                      c
    11. We further direct all trial Courts in India to ordinarily
add Section 302 to the charge of section 3048, so that death
sentence can be imposed in such heinous and barbaric crimes
against women.
                                                                        D
    12. Copy of this order be sent to Registrar Generals/
Registrars of all High Courts, which will circulate it to all trial
Courts.

R.P.                           Special Leave petition adjourned.