Along with the deceased, her son Ajay was also there and both, the deceased and Ajay were burnt.
The State of Gujarat preferred an appeal against the acquittal of the accused persons of the charge under Section 302/34 IPC and the accused persons preferred appeal against their companyviction under Section 498A. The High Court by the impugned Judgment set aside the order of acquittal, relying upon the two dying declarations Exh.
The two appellants were tried for having companymitted an offence under Section 302/34 IPC on the allegation that on 28.6.84 at 4 A.M., while deceased Dhanuben was sleeping on her bed, the two accused persons namely her husband and mother in law poured kerosene and set fire with match box.
The prosecution witnesses to whom deceased had made oral dying declaration, implicating the accused persons, did number support the prosecution during trial and, therefore, with the permission of the Court the Public Prosecutor cross examined them.
45 and Exh.
236 and 105 of 1989 and are being disposed of by this companymon Judgment.
They were taken to the hospital for treatment.
In the hospital, both Dhanuben and her son Ajay died and as such the accused persons stood charged for offence under Sections 498A and 302/34 of the IPC.
In the hospital, Police recorded the statement of Dhanuben which was treated as F.I.R. and then after registering the case, investigation started.
Apart from the statement by deceased Dhanuben to PW 14, which was treated as F.I.R., a Magistrate also recorded her statement which was treated as a dying declaration.
PATTANAIK, J. These two appeals arise out of Judgment dated 21/24.6.1996 of the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Criminal Appeal Nos.
