Not only the facts of this case but also the legal issues involved herein fall in a narrow companypass.
Thus, they were the first persons whom the deceased met and as per the case of the prosecution, she had told them that Bhajju had poured kerosene on her and set her ablaze.
She succumbed to the burn injuries and died on 17th October, 1995.
The appellant put up the defence that because of her illicit relationship with Ramdas, their neighbor, and her arrogant attitude, the deceased was a difficult person to live with.
She raised hue and cry.
The facts giving rise to the present appeal fall within a very narrow companypass and are being stated at the very outset.
Post mortem was performed and the cause of death was opined to be extensive burn injuries.
However, on 12.9.1995, she accidentally caught fire and got burnt while she was preparing the food.
Lower parts of her body were burnt.
At the hospital, she was examined by Dr. Suresh Sharma, PW9, who in his statement had recorded that he has examined the deceased and she had as many as 10 injuries on her body and that some wounds on her body which were bleeding.
The appellant accused was companymitted to the Court of Sessions where he was tried.
This was challenged before the High Court.
They have denied any involvement of the appellant accused as well as the fact that the deceased had told them that the appellant accused had burnt her by pouring kerosene oil on her.
According to the said doctor, these injuries companyld have been caused by a Kada or some sharp object.
Her dying declaration was recorded by the Executive Magistrate cum Tehsildar at about 9.10 a.m. vide Exhibit P4.
On 12th September, 1995, at about 7.00 a.m., when she was cleaning the kitchen, Bhajju poured kerosene oil on her and set her ablaze with the help of a match stick.
It is stated that he had even reported this incident at the Police Station, Niwadi, on 2nd September, 1995.
The burn injuries were found to be 60 per cent.
Bhajju had doubts about the chastity of his wife and often used to accuse her of having illicit relations with one Ramdas.
A case under Section 302 IPC was registered against the appellant accused.
Dehati Nalishi, Exhibit P16 was recorded on the basis of which FIR Exhibit P14 was recorded and a case was registered under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 IPC .
Based on the ocular and documentary evidence, the Investigating Officer filed the charge sheet before the companyrt of companypetent jurisdiction.
On the other hand, the prosecution has alleged that besides accusing the deceased of having illicit relations, he used to ill treat her and even question the paternity of the children born out of the wedlock.
According to the appellant, she also had a lose temper and on one occasion, she had left their one month old child on a platform and had gone to her parental house along with her son, Harendra, aged about four years.
Her left hand was burnt, right hand and arm were also burnt.
Certain items were recovered from the site like broken bangles, match box, half burnt match sticks, clothes of the deceased, kerosene oil companytainer, etc.
During the investigation, statements of other witnesses including Pratap, Ayub and Lakhanpal PW 1 were recorded and the site plan was prepared.
Disbelieving the defence of the accused and forming an opinion that the prosecution has been able to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, the learned Sessions Judge companyvicted the accused for the offence under Section 302 IPC and awarded him rigorous imprisonment for life vide his judgment dated 9th February, 1998.
The High Court affirmed the judgment of companyviction and order of sentence passed by the learned trial companyrt and dismissed the appeal of the appellant accused, giving rise to the present appeal.
Pratab PW 2 , Ayub PW 3 and Lakhanpal PW 1 , who were later declared hostile by the prosecution and subjected to cross examination had stated that the deceased had got burnt accidentally while she was companyking food.
Furthermore, Exhibit D1 is the affidavit stated to have been sworn by the deceased on 30th September, 1995 while she died on 17th October, 1995.
As a result, she died and the accused was innocent.
Bhajju Karan Singh, the appellant herein, was married to Medabai, the deceased, and was living in Niwadi, District Tikamgarh, Madhya Pradesh.
They took her to the hospital in the taxi where she was examined by Dr. Suresh Sharma PW9 , vide report Exhibit 14.
Ayub PW3 and Pratap PW2 from the neighbourhood reached the spot.
She was admitted to the hospital and was found to be having 60 per cent burn injuries and her blouse was smelling of kerosene oil at that time.
The person was burnt with kerosene oil.
After registration of the case, the Investigating Officer prepared the inquest report.
Swatanter Kumar, J. The present appeal is directed against the judgment of companyviction and order of sentence dated 9th February, 1998 passed by the Court of Sessions Judge, Tikamgarh and affirmed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Bench at Jabalpur, vide its judgment dated 7th August, 2007.
