SMT. SADHNA DIXIT Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 4.7.2013 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sarangarh in S.T. No.11/12 convicting the accused/appellant under Section 304 (B) of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'the IPC') and sentencing her to undergo imprisonment for life & fine of Rs.5,000/ -, in default to undergo additional SI for 01 year.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that on 26.11.2011 FIR (Ex.P -21) was lodged by Birendra Dubey (PW -15), father of deceased, alleging in it that marriage of deceased Pragya @ Sapna was solemnized with acquitted accused Sudhir Dixit on 31.1.2011. Immediately after the marriage, the accused persons started harassing and torturing the deceased for bringing inadequate dowry in the marriage. On 24.11.2011 the accused persons had poured the kerosene on her and set her on fire with a matchbox causing 95% burn injuries which has resulted into her death on

(3.) 12.2011 in the hospital. It has been further alleged that on being informed, he visited the hospital where the deceased disclosed to him that she was burnt by the accused persons. Based on this report, un - numbered FIR was registered under Sections 307, 498A, 34 of IPC against the four accused persons i.e. Kamlesh Dixit (father -in -law); Sudhir Dixit (husband); Vimal Dixit (brother -in -law) and the present appellant. Merg intimation (Ex.P -3) was recorded on 3.12.2011. During the course of investigation, three dying declarations of the deceased were recorded on 24.11.2011 vide Ex.P -21, Ex.P -28 and Ex.P -30 and fourth dying declaration of the deceased was recorded on 26.11.2011 vide Ex.P -4. Post -mortem on the body of deceased was performed by Dr. Tarun Kumar (PW -16) who noticed 100% burns and opined that cause of death was shock due to septicaemia by extensive burn. After investigation, charge sheet under Sections 498A, 307, 304B, 34 of the IPC was filed against the accused persons, however, the charge under Section 304 -B of IPC, in alternative under Section 302/34 of IPC was framed against the accused persons by the trial Court. 3. To substantiate the charge against the accused persons, the prosecution has examined 18 witnesses. When the accused persons were questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C. about the incriminating evidence and circumstances, they denied the same and pleaded that they are innocent.