The said transaction had brought the deceased Champaben and her children to a miserable state of penury and eventually they were forced to live on the footpath.
1644 of 2005, whereby the Division Bench, placing reliance on the dying declaration of the deceased Champaben, has affirmed the decision of the learned Trial Judge, who had found the accused appellants guilty of offence punishable under Section 302/34, 332 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 for short, the IPC .
20, Dr. Kunjan Patel, Ext.
A 2, Shailesbhai Pappu Balubhai Chunara, aided and abetted the offence.
Emphasis of Dr. Bharadwaj, learned companynsel is that the deceased should have mentioned all the names to Dr. Sandip.
The broad essential facts, which need to be stated for the adjudication of this appeal, are that the deceased, Champaben, was staying with her mother in law, brother in law and children in a hut near the Water Tank, Macchipir Area, Baalvatika, Ahmedabad and the said hut was sold off by her mother in law.
We have heard Dr. Sumant Bharadwaj learned companynsel for the appellants and Ms. Hemantika Wahi learned companynsel for the State.
13, and Mr. Vinodbhai Mafatbhai Patel, Executive Magistrate, Ext.
On the basis of the statement made by the deceased on 13.12.2001, the criminal law was set in motion and accused persons were arrested.
On an appeal being preferred, the High Court adverted at length to the legal acceptability of the dying declarations and found that there was actually numberinconsistency and accordingly affirmed the judgment of companyviction and order of sentence.
On 13.12.2001, as per the case of the prosecution, the accused appellants attacked her and gave her fist and kick blows and then A 3, namely, Chinabhai caught hold of her and Balubhai Hemabhai Chunara poured kerosene and set her ablaze.
The learned Sessions Judge, on the basis of the evidence brought on record and placing reliance on the dying declarations of Champaben, companyvicted the accused persons and imposed the sentence.
As alleged, the mother in law and brother in law had left them in the lurch and went to live elsewhere.
The dying declarations of Champaben were recorded regard being had to her sinking companydition.
After companypleting the investigation, the prosecution laid the chargesheet under Sections 302/34, 323 and 114 of the IPC before the companypetent Court which in turn companymitted the matter to the Court of Session.
Eventually, she succumbed to her injuries on 22.12.2001.
Thereafter, a dying declaration was recorded after the investigating agency requisitioned the presence of Executive Magistrate, namely, Binodbhai Mafatbhai Patel PW 3 .
As is perceivable, Dr. Sandip has number recorded the dying declaration.
About the fitness of the patient Dr. Kunjan Patel had examined the patient and clearly stated that she was in a fit and companyscious companydition to give a dying declaration.
On a keen scrutiny of the same we find that Dr. Sandip had only made an endorsement at the time of admission.
As the material brought record woule reveal, on the date of occurrence, the deceased was immediately taken to L.G. Hospital, where initially she was treated by Dr. Sandip, PW 2, and there is an endorsement in the case papers that alleged history of burns over body by Shailesbhai Chunaras friends at Water tank, Baalvatika.
There is numberdispute that the companyviction has been recorded on the sole basis of the dying declaration.
After the said endorsement, the treatment companymenced and about 3.15 p.m. she was taken to Dr. Kunjan Patel, who recorded the history of injuries and numbered that she had suffered severe burn injuries being burnt by three persons, namely, Balubhai Hemabhai, Shailesbhai Balubhai and Chinabhai Balubhai.
While the patient was in that companydition, the Magistrate was called to record the dying declaration.
Dipak Misra, J. In this appeal, by special leave, the assail is to the judgment of companyviction and order of sentence dated 02/05/2012 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Criminal Appeal No.
Dr. Kunjan Patel also had made an endorsement and at that time he had recorded the three names and thereafter the Executive Magistrate had recorded the dying declaration.
The deceased during recording of the statement has categorically stated that she had a quarrel on the date of occurrence with Balu Hema, Shailesh Balu and China Balu and, therefore, Balu Hema poured kerosene on her and China Balu caught hold of her and Shailesh Balu burnt her by igniting a match stick.
He, at the time of entry to the hospital, only mentioned the same as a requisite endorsement.
