RAKESH GORDHANBHAI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this Appeal, filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ( Sthe Code for short) is to the correctness of the judgment and order dated 1.4.1999 rendered in Sessions Case No. 254 of 1997 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Surat, by which the sole Appellant ( Sthe Accused for short) has been convicted for commission of the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code ( SIPC for short), and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.2000/- i.d. simple imprisonment of 6 months for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and RI for 2 years and fine of Rs.500/- id SI of 2 months for the offence punishable under Section 498A IPC. It is also ordered that both the sentences shall run concurrently.

(2.) The prosecution case as disclosed from the FIR and unfolded during trial is as under:

(3.) Ms. Sadhna Sagar, learned advocate of the Accused, appointed by legal aid committee, has submitted that there is no eye witness to the incident. The case of the prosecution, is based on two sets of dying declarations made by the deceased, one of which is made before PW-23 Dr. Prashant Ramniklal Bhatt to the effect that her husband had sprinkled kerosene on her and set her ablaze. Similar dying declaration was also made by the deceased before PW-24 Ramdas Shankarsinh Shah, who was on duty at Civil Hospital. On the basis of the said dying declaration, entry in the vardhy was recorded at Mahidharpura Police Station, which was conveyed by PW-24 Ramdas Shankarsinh Shah, duty Constable at Civil Hospital. So far as second set of dying declaration is concerned, which the deceased had stated before PW-5 Dr. Sejalben Chandrakantbhai Reshamvala, it is to the effect that the deceased had committed suicide by sprinkling kerosene on herself and setting herself ablaze. Similar version is also given by her in the dying declaration which was recorded by PW-3 Jariyatsingh Rajpatsingh Thakur, Executive Magistrate. She has further submitted that the dying declarations, which were made by the deceased, were before the independent persons, are in two sets. Therefore, it is not coming on record, which dying declaration is correct.