After investigation charge sheet under section 302 IPC was filed against the appellant.
On such information a formal FIR under section 307 IPC was registered.
PW 11/A Muhshi Ram PW 4 and Joginder Singh PW 5 neighbours of the parties Hari Singh PW 10 father of the deceased Chhano Devi PW 17 mother of the deceased Prem Singh PW 16 a nephew of the deceased and Baltej Singh PW 19 , Sub Inspector of Police, the Investigating Officer.
On being informed about it by the duty companystable, S.I. Balej Singh PW 19 arrived at thehoepital and obtained the medico legal certificate of the deceased in which it was stated inter alia that the story given by the patient was to the effect that she was burnt by her husband by pouring kerosene oil after a fight between the two.
The High Court on perusal of the oral and documentary evidence came to the companyclusion that the dying declaration was reliable piece of evidence on which the order of companyviction companyld be based and accordingly companyfirmed the judgment and order of the trial companyrt.
The learned trial judge, as appears from the discussion in the judment, believed the procecution case that it was the accused who poured kerosene on his wife and lit the match stick on account of which she suffered the fatal injuries, relying mainly on the dying declaration Exh.
The prosecution examined in all 19 witnesses including three Doctors.
11/A and accordingly passed the order of companyviction and sentence.
The genes is of the case is that the relationship between the appellant and the deceased was number companydial.
Neither the neighbourers number the relations of the deceased supported the prosecution case and they were cross examined by the public prosecutor with permiss Ion of the Court.
Having denied the charge the appellant faced trial.
On the intervening night of 25/26.9.90 the deceased was admitted to the Jai Prakash Narain Hospital Delhi LNJPN with extensive burn injuries on her body.
to as deceased and the order sentencing him to R.I. for life whicn was companyfirmed by the High Court of Delhi incriminal Appeal No.91/94, is under challenge. ,
Anil Kurmar Aggarwal PW 2 , who companyducted the post mortem examination of the deceased Dr. S. Bhandari PW 3 , who was the head of the unit of the LNJPN Hospital, Delhi in which, injured Wanti Devi was admitted Dr. Gaurav Nijhara PW 11 , who is said to have recorded the dying declaration of the deceased Ex.
Thereafter the deceased returned to her marital home and started living with appellant This happened about 7 8 months before the fateful incident.
It was his case that the injuries sustained by the deceased were accidental and the incident occurred when she was trying to light the kerosene stove.
On the intervention of their relations and will wishers the differences were patched up and she withdrew she case.
Later in the day at about 9.45 a.m. on receiving the information that Wanti Devl expired at 8.35 a.m. the case was companyverted into one under section 302 IPC.
The deceased had gone to the Court with a claim for maintenance against the appellant.
