RAMADHAR AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As both these appeals arise of a common judgment dated 6th July, 2002 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur in ST No. 263/2001, they are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) In the present case, name of the deceased is Shivkumari, wife of accused No. 1 Parmeshwar. Accused No. 2 Ramadhar is father-in-law of the deceased whereas accused No. 3 Rameshwar is her brother-in-law. Marriage of the deceased was solemnized with accused No. 1 Parmeshwar on 13-12-1997. On 18-2-2001 in the morning at about 8 a.m. Shivkumari was set ablaze by accused No. 1 by pouring kerosene on her at her parents "™ house. She was immediately taken to hospital, from where information was sent to the police vide memo Ex. P/4 dated 18-2-2001. On 18-2-2001 itself dying declaration of the deceased was recorded vide Ex. P/12 by the Executive Magistrate (PW-9 PS Toppo). On 21-2-2001 during treatment the deceased succumbed to the burn injuries and memo Ex. P/ 5 was sent from hospital to the concerned police station. Based on this information, merg intimation Ex. P/6 was recorded on 21-2-2001. Inquest over the dead body was prepared on 21-2-2001 vide Ex. P/1 and the body was thereafter sent for post-mortem which was conducted on the same day vide Ex. P/3 by PW-5 Dr. C.M. Tiwari. In the opinion of autopsy surgeon, the deceased died of shock secondary to superficial to deep, ante-mortem bum injuries about 90%. After merg enquiry, FIR (Ex. P/8) was registered against accused Nos. 1 and 2 on 16-3-2001 under Sections 302, 304B, 34 of I.P.C. After investigation charge-sheet was filed against all the accused persons. While framing charge, the trial Judge framed charge against accused No. 1 under Sections 498A, 304B in the alternative 302 or in the alternative 306 of IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act whereas accused Nos. 2 and 3 were charged under Sections 498A, 304B or alternatively, 306 of IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

(3.) So as to hold the accused persons guilty, the prosecution examined as many as 11 witnesses. Statements of the accused persons were also recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. in which they denied the circumstances appearing against them in the prosecution case, pleaded innocence and false implication. They also examined one witness in defence.