Tehsildar PW4 recorded the statement of Anita Ext.
P11 dying declaration.
In the appeal preferred by the appellant, the High Court companyfirmed the companyviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC and the sentence imposed on him and acquitted him under Section 354 IPC.
Anita was brought to Shanti Hospital, Narnaund by her father in law Jai Singh with 95 burn injuries on her body on the same day at 4.00 p.m. On receipt of the information from the Medical Officer and after obtaining opinion of the Medical Officer that Anita was in a fit companydition to make the statement, Assistant Sub Inspector of Police PW 8 requested PW 4, Tehsildar to record the statement of Anita.
The learned companynsel for the appellant companytended that though PW 4, Tehsildar got the certificate regarding fitness of the deceased to make the statement, yet numberspecific certificate was obtained by him that the deceased remained companyscious throughout while recording her statement.
P11 in which deceased Anita stated that her brother in law Prempal grappled with her and pushed her aside and poured kerosene upon her and set her ablaze.
The investigating officer recorded the statement of Dhan Singh PW 7 and Chhotu Ram father of Anita.
Briefly stated, the case of the prosecution is that, marriage of Smt.
On receipt of the request from PW 8, ASI, PW 4, Tehsildar reached the hospital at 9.15 P.M. and PW 4, Tehsildar again obtained the opinion of PW 3, Doctor and PW 3, Dr. Suresh opined that Anita was fit to make the statement and only thereafter PW 4, Tehsildar recorded her statement which is Ext.
Much reliance was placed upon the above answers elicited from the doctor PW 3 to assail the reliability of Ext.
Tehsildar cum Executive Magistrate PW 4 reached the hospital and again sought opinion of the Medical Officer Ext.
On receipt of intimation about the death of Anita, the investigating officer went to the hospital and held the inquest proceedings and prepared the Inquest Report.
P11 statement.
The companyaccused Jai Singh was acquitted of the charge.
Based on her statement, FIR was registered under Section 307 IPC against the appellant.
When Anita was all alone, the appellant Prempal grappled with Anita and pushed her down and alleged to have set her on fire at about 3.00 p.m. along with Jai Singh, father of the appellant.
The trial companyrt also companyvicted the appellant under Section 354 IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and both the sentences were ordered to run companycurrently.
The answers elicited from PW 3 during the cross examination is only an opinion.
The case registered under Section 307 IPC was altered into Section 302 IPC and after companypletion of investigation, charge sheet was filed against the appellant and Jai Singh father in law of deceased.
Appeal No.
To bring home the guilt of accused, prosecution examined eight witnesses and exhibited number of documents and material objects.
In his evidence, PW 3 stated that Anita remained companyscious and was in a fit companydition when PW 4, Tehsildar recorded the statement, he PW 3 remained throughout and he also endorsed Ext.
PW 1, Dr. J.P. Malik companyducted autopsy on the body of deceased Anita and issued the Post Mortem Certificate.
Being aggrieved, the appellant has preferred this appeal.
While so, Anita had numberreason to falsely implicate her brother in law.
On 24.10.2001 at 3.00 p.m. Anita was all alone at her matrimonial house located at village Budana.
On 24.10.2001 at about 11.45 P.M., Anita succumbed to injuries.
Anita deceased with Dharampal was solemnized in the year 1997.
Appellant Prempal is the younger brother of Dharampal.
Per companytra, learned companynsel for the respondent State submitted that dying declaration of Anita is true and voluntary and number a result of tutoring and relying upon the same, trial companyrt and the High Court have rightly based the companyviction and the same warrants numberinterference.
PW 8 had taken up the investigation and prepared the Rough Site Map of the spot and seized material objects from the scene of the crime.
716 DB/2002, in and by which the High Court companyfirmed the companyviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC and also the sentence of life imprisonment imposed on the appellant.
In his cross examination, PW 3 stated that Anita sustained 95 burns and chances cannot be ruled out that a person can be unconscious having 95 burns.
Deceased and her husband Dharampal were living separately.
P13 who opined that Anita was fit to make a statement.
After companyclusion of the trial, the trial companyrt companyvicted the appellant under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs.
BANUMATHI, J. This appeal arises out of the judgment of High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh dated 28.11.2011 passed in Crl.
Her husband Dharampal working as a teacher in village Milakpur had number returned home from the school her mother in law had gone to her parents house.
5,000/ with default clause.
