3,000/ by the Sessions Court was set aside.
Accordingly, Jamadar Sultan Siddi went to the Gondal hospital and recorded the companyplaint of the deceased at about 12.45 p.m., which is the First Information Report.
Nita in turn informed witness Babulal Liladhar and the deceased was taken to Gondal Government dispensary at about 9.35 a.m. At Gondal Government dispensary the deceased was examined by Dr. Hareshkumar N. Savaliya, who was a Medical Officer at the said dispensary and on finding that the deceased has sustained more than 60 burns, he advised the persons accompanying her to remove her to Rajkot Hospital.
The trial companyrt found the FIR as well as dying declaration reliable and trustworthy.
Accordingly, Mr. D.P. Trivedi, Executive Magistrate had gone to Gondal Hospital and after verifying from Dr. Savaliya that deceased was companyscious and in a fit state of mind to make statement, recorded her dying declaration.
The factum of recording of the FIR as also the dying declaration is also number disputed.
Charges were framed against the appellant under section 302 of IPC, to which she pleaded number guilty.
The appellant herein, who is the mother in law of Santokben, was dissatisfied with Santokben because she was number able to bear a boy.
According to prosecution on 29.11.1984 at about 7.00 a.m. the deceased with her youngest daughter Minaxi had gone to fetch water and while she was returning with water pot on her head and carrying Minaxi with the other hand, the appellant came and threw a burning wick made of rags on the deceased and thereby set fire to the terylene clothes put on by the deceased.
to prove its case against the appellant.
As per the Judgment and Order of the Additional Sessions Judge, Gondal, the appellant accused was taken into custody on 15.6.1985 to undergo the sentence and was released on 07.09.1989 on expiry of the sentence.
At about 11.00 a.m. on that day an information was companyveyed by Mr. Ghanshyambhai, who was police companystable on duty at Gondal hospital, to Umiyashanker Jivram, P.S.O. at Gondal Taluka Police Station about the deceased having been admitted in the hospital for treatment of her burn injuries.
It is established from the dying declaration of the deceased that she was living separately from her mother in law, the appellant herein, for many years and that on the day in question she had a quarrel with the appellant at her house.
Necessary investigation into the case was made by Mr. L.S. Chavda, P.S.I., of Gondal Taluka, Police Station.
There is also evidence on record to prove and establish that the action of the appellant to throw the burning tonsil was preceded by a quarrel between the deceased and the appellant.
After recording of evidence of prosecution witnesses, the learned Judge recorded the statement of the appellant under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Being aggrieved by the Judgment and Order of companyviction passed by the Honble Additional Sessions Judge, Gondal in Case No.
At the instance of Head Constable C.D. Vyas, Dr. Tarlikaben H. Shah performed autopsy on the dead body of the deceased.
The deceased brought down her minor daughter whom she was carrying and managed to reach her house with the burn injuries.
15 of 1985, the State of Gujarat preferred an appeal being Criminal Appeal No.
After reducing the companyplaint FIR of the deceased into writing, he obtained the thumb impression of the deceased thereon Exhibit 46 .
Hence, the appellant filed the present appeal.
After the marriage she gave birth to three children, who were all girls.
3,000/ and in lieu to undergo further imprisonment of one year.
Mr. Umiyashanker had in turn asked Jamadar Sultan Siddi at about 11.00 a.m. to go to the dispensary and record the companyplaint.
In order to appreciate the rival companytentions advanced by the parties and issues involved, it would be necessary to set out brief facts of the case which gave rise to the present criminal appeal.
Deceased Santokben was married to Parshottambhai Patel of village Jamvadi, Taluka Gondal, District Rajkot.
The deceased was admitted in the hospital with about 60 burn injuries and during the companyrse of treatment developed septicemia, which was the main cause of death of the deceased.
Thereafter, the deceased was removed to Rajkot Government hospital.
The prosecution examined 20 witnesses and also produced documentary evidence such as postmortem report of the deceased, dying declaration of the deceased recorded by Mr. Trivedi, companyplaint lodged by the deceased, different panchnamas etc.
3,000/ , in default, rigorous imprisonment for one year.
After reaching her house the deceased summoned her daughter Nita who had gone to attend her school.
The post mortem report of the deceased was placed on record during the trial and Dr. Tarlikaben, who companyducted the post mortem examination was also examined as a witness in the trial.
The appellant denied the case of the prosecution, but did number examine any witness in support of her case.
The trial companyrt companycluded that though it was proved that the appellant had set the deceased on fire, the medical evidence established that the injuries sustained by the deceased were number sufficient in the ordinary companyrse of nature to cause her death and, therefore, the appellant companymitted offence punishable under Section 304 Part II of IPC.
After a careful analysis of the facts and circumstances of the case we find that it is number in dispute that the alleged incident took place in the morning of November 29, 1984 when the deceased was companying back with water pot on her head and her daughter on her waist.
Accordingly, by judgment and order dated 15.06.1985, the appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.
As the offence under Section 302 of IPC was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was companymitted to the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gondal, District Rajkot, for trial.
However, by the said order, imposition of the fine of Rs.
The allegation is that the appellant set her on fire with a burning wick made of rags companysequent whereupon the deceased suffered burn injuries on the whole body and succumbed to her injuries on 07.12.1984 during the companyrse of treatment.
During the companyrse of treatment the deceased died on 07.12.1984.
The dying declaration of the deceased, which is produced by Mr. Trivedi, Executive Magistrate, at Exhibit 15 indicates that while deceased was returning home after fetching water, the appellant had set her terylene clothes on fire by means of a burning wick of rags.
Dr. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA, J. The present appeal is filed against the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Gujarat holding that the case of the appellant herein is companyered under Clause 4 of Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code for short the IPC and, companysequent thereto companyvicting her under Section 302 of IPC for murder of her daughter in law Santokben alias Muktaben and sentencing the appellant to imprisonment for life.
Meanwhile at about 11.20 a.m. witness D.P. Trivedi, who was on duty at that time as Deputy Mamlatdar sent a report to Executive Magistrate that the deceased was admitted to hospital with burn injuries and he should record her dying declaration.
The trial companyrt held that the prosecution proved that the deceased died a homicidal death.
