MUBARIK Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants above named stood convicted for commission of murder and dowry death of Rehmat Bi, daughter-in-law of appellant Nos. 1 and 3 and wife of appellant No. 2 in nuptial home by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Sonkatch, District Dewas in Sessions Trial No. 197/96, thereby finding the appellant Kamrunnissa guilty of the offence punishable under Section 302 and Section 304-B, Indian Penal Code and appellants Mubarik and Shakir Hussain of the offence punishable under Section 304-B, Indian Penal Code convicted them accordingly and sentenced Kamrunnissa to suffer imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment thereof to suffer further R. I. for one year under Section 302, Indian Penal Code and to suffer imprisonment for life under Section 304-B, Indian Penal Code and appellants Mubarik and Shakir Hussain each to suffer imprisonment for life under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code. They have, therefore, preferred this appeal.

(2.) THE facts of the prosecution case giving rise to the prosecution of the appellants before the Trial Court in nutshell were that before three/four years prior to the date of incident, Rehmat Bi, daughter of Abdul Rauf was married to accused/appellant Shakir in Bhavrasa. After marriage, Rehmat Bi used to visit her husband's house at Bhavrasa. On 21-6-96, in the morning at 8. 30 A. M. she was ablazed and therefore, was taken to Indore and was admitted in M. Y. Hospital, Indore. There, on 23-6-96, her Dying Declaration (Ex. P-15) was recorded by the Addl. Tehsildar/executive Magistrate Kaushal Bansal (P. W. 18 ). Thereafter, on 24-6-96 she died in the hospital, information whereof was given by the Hospital to Police Station, Sanyogitaganj, Indore and this police station in its turn informed the Police Station, Bhavrasa about the demise of Rehmat Bi. Police, Bhavrasa registered crime at No. 101/96. The First Information Report is Ex. P-12. Post-mortem examination on the dead body of Rehmat Bi was performed by Dr. P. C. Jain (P. W. 7) and issued post-mortem examination report (Ex. P-6 ). During investigation, it was revealed that the accused/appellants used to torture the deceased for demand of dowry and ultimately on the date of incident, she was ablazed after pouring kerosene oil on her person.

(3.) ON these allegations, the accused/appellants, were charge-sheeted for the aforesaid offences before the Trial Court, where they pleaded not guilty and stated that they have been falsely implicated and claimed trial. During trial, the prosecution, to establish its case, examined as many as 18 witnesses while the appellants examined only one witness in defence. After conclusion of trial, the learned Trial Court finding the appellants guilty of the offences, convicted and sentenced them as indicated hereinabovc.