On the fateful night intervening between 28.12.1994 and 29.12.1994, it is alleged that the appellant returned home in the midnight in a drunken state.
The appellant has a shop of electronic goods and he is also doing the work of repairing T.V. and giving cable companynections.
On 29.12.1994 in the numbern, H.C. Pimpalkar PW 6 recorded the dying declaration of Seema Ex.51 .
However, they companyld number pull on there for long and they again started residing separately in a rented house owned by one Sunil Anandrao Nimje.
Initially offences under Section 498 A read with Section 34 of I.P.C. were registered at P.S. Mouda and subsequently offence under Sections 306/34 of I.P.C. was added.
Heard learned companynsel for the parties and perused the record.
The post mortem examination revealed that the burns were 79 and the cause of death was septicimea as a result of infected burns.
On the same day in the afternoon, Shri Manekar, Executive Magistrate PW 9 recorded her dying declaration Ex.61 .
On the next day i.e. on 30.12.1994, H.C. Nirgulkar PW 4 recorded her statement Ex.40 .
She was immediately taken to the hospital of Dr. Chandak in Nagpur and thereafter to Government Medical College and Hospital, Nagpur.
However, since they were within the prohibited degrees of relationship, the parents of both the appellant as well as Seema were against their marriage.
5397/2006 MARKANDEY KATJU, J. Leave granted.
There was a quarrel between him and Seema with the result that Seema poured kerosene on her person and set herself ablaze.
For some time, they resided separate from the appellants parents, but after intervention of some relatives, they went to reside with the parents of the appellant.
It was numbericed by Seema that the appellant returned late at night and that too in a drunken state.
Hence the appellant and Seema eloped from their parental houses and got married at Katol on 9.4.1991.
On 21.2.1992 the appellant and Seema were blessed with a son namely Mandar.
He started neglecting his wife Seema and son Mandar.
After marriage they came back to Mouda.
Hence it is alleged that the so called first written dying declaration Ex.51 would number render the voluminous evidence untrustworthy.
The appellant also neglected his business.
This appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment of the Bombay High Court Nagpur Bench dated 17.8.2006 in Criminal Appeal No.135 of 1996.
They were also related.
The facts of the case are that the father of the appellant and the father of Seema were serving in Forest Department.
The trial companyrt after companysidering the evidence held that the offences have been proved against the appellant but acquitted the appellants father and mother.
The appellant and Seema fell in love with each other.
Seema companyplained to her parents by sending them letters.
On 5.1.1995, Seema succumbed to the burn injuries.
However, it is alleged that the relations between the appellant and Seema did number remain companydial.
Against the said judgment the appellant filed an appeal which has been dismissed by the High Court and hence this appeal by special leave.
