The prosecution case is that on 28th June, 1986, deceased Sunder Bai went to the house of appellant Shambhu requesting him to repay the sum of Rs.1,000/ entrusted by her with the appellant.
The dying declaration was recorded in the form of question answers.
Learned Sessions Judge also disbelieved PW 9 on the ground that he was number in a position to state the percentage of the burn injuries on the body of the deceased Sunder Bai he had number brought the memorandum received from the police station and that he did number verify whether the doctor had given sedatives to the deceased.
PW 9 was also disbelieved on the ground that he deposed that he reached the hospital in a scooter whereas the Police Inspector had deposed otherwise.
One thousand, then he called me in the evening.
It was recorded at 10.45 PM on 28.6.1986.
He saw the deceased Sunder Bai set on fire by appellant Shambhu.
The finding of the High Court is challenged before us.
The learned Sessions Judge acquitted the appellant for the reasons that the First Information Report was recorded belatedly and there were a series of discrepancies in Ex.
The evidence of PW 9 shows that when he recorded the dying declaration the doctor was present and he had certified that Sunder Bai was in a fit state to make the statement.
The translated version of the relevant portion of the dying declaration of deceased Sunder Bai is as follows I had kept my money with Shambhu.
PW 2, Amritlal, having reached Prianko companyony on a bicycle, heard the sound of bachao, bachao help, help and went near the house of appellant Shambhu.
P 1 F.I. Statement and that the dying declaration recorded by PW 9 was number reliable as there was numbersatisfactory evidence to show that Sunder Bai was in a fit state to give the dying declaration.
Ten witnesses were examined on the side of the prosecution and the main items of evidence relied on by the prosecution were the evidence of PW 2 and the dying declaration allegedly made by deceased Sunder Bai, which was recorded by PW 9, the Executive Magistrate.
PW 9, the Executive Magistrate, got intimation from the Police that deceased Sunder Bai was admitted in the hospital and that her dying declaration was to be recorded.
PW 9, Executive Magistrate, reached the hospital and recorded the dying declaration of deceased Sunder Bai.
In the meantime, the husband of the deceased Sunder Bai also reached the place of incident.
Hearing the sounds, many other people companylected there and some of them took Sunder Bai to hospital.
When I went today to ask for my money, which was about Rs.
The Sessions Judge found them number guilty and acquitted of the charges framed against them.
PW 10, Mohan Singh, S.H.O. Police Station Annapurna, visited the place of incident in the night of 26th June itself.
Aggrieved by the judgment of the Sessions Court, the State of Madhya Pradesh preferred an appeal before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh and the Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court found the present appellant guilty of offences punishable under Section 302 IPC, for having caused the death of one Sunder Bai and he was sentenced to imprisonment for life.
P 1 report.
When I again went at about 7.00/8.00 P.M. then he asked me to sit at Charav and then immediately the wife of Shambhu had sprinkled the kerosene oil at me and Shambhu had lit the match stick and said lighted match stick was touched with my body.
He also visited the M.Y. Hospital where the deceased was admitted with burn injuries.
The further case of the prosecution is that the appellant companymitted rape on Sunder Bai and thereafter, the appellants wife, Sadhna Bai poured kerosene oil on the body of Sunder Bai and the appellant set fire to her.
PW 2, Amritlal, went to the Police Station and gave Ex.
PW 10 sent a requisition to the Executive Magistrate, PW 9, for recording dying declaration of the deceased.
He reached the hospital and recorded the dying declaration of the deceased Sunder Bai.
Subsequently, Sunder Bai died while undergoing treatment in the hospital and her body was subjected to post mortem examination.
G. BALAKRISHNAN, J. Appellant Shambhu and his wife Sadhna Bai were tried by the Court of Addl.
Against the present appellant, there was also a charge under Section 376 IPC.
