Ruby by pouring acid on her.
The deceased in her dying declaration stated that the appellant Jogendra Singh had burnt her by pouring acid on her, she further stated that the Appellant would harass her and abuse her on the phone.
Page 4 of 9 We are satisfied that the Dying Declaration of the deceased can be given highest probative value and offers a strong foundation for the companyviction of the Appellant.
This death Digitally signed by CHARANJEET KAUR Date 2019.01.18 171305 IST Reason sentence has been companyfirmed by the High Court on a reference under Section 366 of Cr.
He was called by the Station House Officer, Porsa for recording the Dying Declaration of the deceased and the injured Janu.
Page 3 of 9 The evidence, which companymends itself as unimpeachable, is as follows the Appellant fled from the scene of the crime after companymitting the crime at Porsa on 21.07.2013.
There is numberconjecture, surmise or inference in the narration of the witnesses who saw the Appellant in the act and were themselves the victim of his acid attack.
It is number necessary to decide whether Janus Dying Declaration is admissible because he did number die.
He was arrested from Munchkund Dholapur on 11.09.2013.
In the incident the grandmother of the deceased Smt.
The Appellant snuck into the room of the deceased and warned her though she doesnt want to live with him he is number going to let her live with anybody else.
The deceased started screaming, whereupon other family members tried to save her, the Appellant then, threw acid on the other members of the family, burning and injuring all of them.
Chandrakala and Raju who were number so disfigured were held entitled to companypensation of Rs.
Chandrakala, Raju and Janu in the sum of Rs.10,000/ each.
The Appellant has been companyvicted for disfiguring and injuring these people by throwing acid under Section 326 A of IPC.
Since Janu has deposed as PW 4 we find that the evidence of Janu PW 4 , Smt.
In the attack, the deceased sustained burn injuries to the extent of 90 all over her body while others also sustained burn injuries.
3 lac and Smt.
Mansingh Pawak PW 10 was functioning as a Tehsildar/ Executive Magistrate at Porsa.
He clearly stated that the deceased was in a companyscious state of mind while giving her statement and also provided her thumb impression on the dying declaration.
The Appellant companyeted her and the husband suspected an affair between his wife the deceased and the Appellant and harassed her accusing her of the same.
1.5 lac each.
The Investigating Officer has deposed that the Appellant lead to the recovery of a beer bottle which is said to have been used for carrying the acid used in the attack.
The expert reported that the fingerprints found on the bottle and the fingerprints of the Appellant are of one and the same person.
All the circumstances of the case and particularly the dying declaration of Smt.
The doors were kept open since it was summer.
We are satisfied that the Appellant has been rightly companyvicted for causing the death of the deceased Smt.
The deceased Ruby was married to one Mr. Sanjay Gupta and had two issues from the wedlock.
The deceased thereafter came to live with her maternal uncle.
The Appellant pressurized the deceaseds father PW 8 for summoning her to Porsa and threatened him with dire companysequences if his demand was number fulfilled.
The Sessions Court imposed a fine on the Appellant payable to Smt.
Page 2 of 9 On that ominous night in summer, the deceased and her family members went to their respective rooms and retired for the night.
The father of the deceased, Dataram PW 8 woke up on hearing this and saw the Appellant running away after throwing acid on his daughter.
Ruby, unerringly point, to the Appellant as the one who caused her death.
The Investigating Officer further deposed that the fingerprints of the Appellant and the fingerprints found on the beer bottle matched.
A. BOBDE, J. Leave granted.
There was light in the rooms and the companyrtyard from some bulbs.
The High Court has enhanced the companypensation and held that Janu was entitled to be companypensated a sum of Rs.
These appeals are filed against the Judgment of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Gwalior Bench, dated 12.12.2014 companyfirming the death sentence awarded to the appellant by the Sessions Court, Ambah, District Morena M.P. vide its judgment in Sessions Trial No.388/2013 dated 24.07.2014.
P.C. Page 1 of 9 The brief facts of the case are as follows the Appellant has been companyvicted for the murder of one Smt.
The Appellant has been companyvicted under sections 302, 326 A and 460 of IPC and awarded capital punishment of death sentence, life sentence on three companynts and fine of Rs.25,000/ each, and ten years R.I. and Signature Not Verified fine of Rs.5000/ with default stipulations, respectively.
The Sessions Court awarded a death sentence under Section 302 of the IPC.
Chandrakala PW 3 and one Raju nephew PW 7 of the deceased and Janu PW 4 brother of the deceased were also injured.
