STATE OF M P Vs. KAILASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed against the acquittal of respondent for an offence under Section 302, I. P. C. and Section 498-A, I. P. C.

(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution, deceased Mamta was burnt on 29. 1. 1987 at her house. She was admitted to the District Hospital, Shivpuri, where she died 10 days after the incident on 9. 2. 1987. She remained in Hospital for 10 days. It is alleged that respondent has beaten his wife Mamta and burnt her by pouring kerosene oil upon her. After burning Mamta she was pushed out of the room where the wife of her husband's elder brother and aunt have extinguished fire by pouring water on her body and she was sent to the District Hospital where she died on 9. 2. 1987,

(3.) THERE is no eye-witness to the incident. Prosecution case rests upon the oral dying declaration. P. W. 1 Ramavtar has deposed that the deceased remained unconscious for 3-4 days and thereafter she regained consciousness. When she regained consciousness at that time this witness Ramavtar, his father Mangilal, respondent Kailash and Kailash's sister-in-law were present. Deceased told him that she was beaten and burnt by Kailash. However, P. W. 2 Mangilal has deposed that deceased gave oral dying declaration to him when no one was present on the spot. Ramavtar has deposed that the dying declaration was given between 12. 00-1. 00 O'clock in the night. Mangilal has deposed that time of dying declaration was 2. 00 a. m. , whereas P. W. 3 Parvati Bai has deposed that in the afternoon when she was alone oral dying declaration was given by the deceased. Shakuntala has given similar statement. Oral dying declaration of these witnesses does not corroborate each other. Even otherwise it is stated that the deceased was beaten and thereafter burnt, but this fact is not corroborated by medical evidence. P. W. 6 Dr. A. P. Srivastava, performed the post-mortem and P. W. 7 Dr. D. K. Bansal has deposed that post-mortem was performed before him. MLC report of deceased is Ex. D-8, which was proved by D. W. 4 Dr. C. P. Tiwari. In Ex. D-8 only burn injuries are mentioned and injuries on the body of deceased were not found. Thus, oral evidence about beating by respondent Kailash to deceased is not corroborated by medical evidence. In her case diary statement before police deceased has mentioned that her clothes caught fire while cooking food on stove. Witnesses have not deposed a word about demand of dowry against the respondent. In the said facts of the case Trial Court has acquitted the respondents.