STATE DELHIADMINISTRATION Vs. KULDEEP KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal is directed against the judgment of acquittal in case FlR No. 461/79 P.S. Kingsway Camp, Delhi under Sections 302/34 of Indian Penal Code (in short ' IPC'). The two accused. Kuldeep Kaur and Jitender Kaur @ Veenu, were the mother-in-law and sister-in-law of late Tarvinder Kaur (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased'). The deceased was admitted to LNJP Hospital on the evening of 15.5.1979, with severe burn injuries on her body. She eventually expired on 19.5.1979. The two accused (respondents herein) were accused of having killed the deceased by causing the burns. Kuldeep Kaur allegedly poured the kerosene oil on the deceased and Jitender Kaur set her on fire by means of a match-stick. The deceased was married to Sat Pal son of Sardar Harbans Singh resident of F-3/7, Model Town, Delhi on 3.12.1978. The unfortunate incident took place on 15.5.1979. The prosecution case relies upon two dying declarations of the deceased, one recorded by a Police Sub-inspector and the other by a Magistrate apart from a series of dying declarations allegedly made to the relatives of the deceased which were made prior to the dying declarations made to the police officer and to the Magistrate. Yet the learned Sessions Judge has acquitted the two accused/respondents. Hence the appeal.

(2.) The Sessions Judge has disbelieved the testimonies of the relatives of the deceased who claim to have heard the dying declarations from the deceased. He has also found the dying declarations recorded by the police officer and the Magistrate unreliable, inter alia, on the ground that the two dying declarations were not corroborated by any circumstantial or other evidence and the scientific evidence was contrary to the dying declarations. The Sessions Judge also indicated that the prosecution had failed to establish any motive for the alleged offence.

(3.) Before we proceed to analyse the evidence on record and the contentions of the appellant, we have to keep in mind the scope within which an appellate Court can examine a judgment of acquittal.