PREMSINGH Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this appeal, the appellants have challenged their conviction under Sections 460 and 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and consequent sentence of R.I. for five years and imprisonment for life respectively passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Ujjain in S.T. No. 332/95 on 25.9.96.

(2.) The facts of the prosecution case in brief an unfolded before the Trial Court were that on 27.5.95, the deceased Kusumbai had lodged a report at Police Station, Bhat Pachlana against the appellants for abusing and beating her on account of land dispute (Ex. P22A). On 31.5.95, she again lodged a report with regard to demanding of copy of the report by the accused/appellants and assaulting her by knife and lathi (Ex. P23A). The accused were pressurizing the deceased for compromise and on 17.7.95 when she refused to enter into compromise the accused abused her. In the intervening night of 17th and 18th July, 1995, at 12 o'clock the deceased Kusumbai was sleeping in the Verandah of her house and her husband Sohansingh was sleeping in the adjoining room in fever. Feeling pressure on her mouth, the deceased woke up and saw accused Premsingh gagging her mouth and accused Yeshwant was having a bottle of kerosene oil. As a result of refusal to enter into a compromise by the deceased, the accused Yeshwant sprinkled kerosene oil at her chest and the clothes below her chest and lit fire with a match stick. Appellant Premsingh continued gagging her mouth. However, she managed to raise cry. Sohansingh saw both the accused persons running away at that time. Deceased Kusumbai narrated the incident to her husband and ran towards a pit of water in front of her house and jumped therein and became unconscious. The next day the incident was narrated to village Chowkidar Sitaram (PW 4) and others also. Kusumbai was got admitted in Barnagar Hospital for treatment. There she was medically examined by Dr. L.N. Kapadia (PW 1). Her MLC reports are Ex. P1 and P2 disclosing 49 per cent burn injuries. In the injury report Ex. P1, she had disclosed that her relations have set her to fire. The hospital authorities sent a report to this effect at Police Station Barnagar and managed to record her dying declaration. On 18.7.95, a case under Sections 307/34, IPC was registered vide Ex. P8. Dying declaration of Kusumbai was recorded by the Executive Magistrate Mr. Tulsiram Koshtha (PW 11) Ex. P4. At Police Bhat Pachlana the crime was registered vide FIR Ex. P9 on the basis of the report Ex. P8. During investigation statement of the deceased under Section 161, Cr.P.C. was recorded, and spot map Ex. P 14 was prepared. From the spot a burnt GODADI (bedding), bed-sheet, petticoat (GHAGHRA), and pieces of half burnt saree and the earth from which smell of kerosene was present, were seized vide Ex. P6. The accused persons were arrested vide Memos Ex. P10 and P11. On memorandum statement of appellant Yeshwant (Ex. P12) from his house one kerosene bottle having some drops of kerosene and one match box were seized through memos Ex. P13 and P13A. The seized articles were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, and its report is Ex. P25. Contrary to the advice of the doctors, the husband of the deceased took her to his house where she expired on 29.7.95. Therefore offence under Section 302, IPC was added. Information of death is Ex. P24A. Autopsy on the dead body of Kusumbai was conducted by Dr. Azad Kumar Jain (PW 2) and gave P.M. Report Ex. P3, according to which the mode of death of Kusumbai was coma and death was due to burn injuries and septicemia/infection. Duration of death was within six to twelve hours from the time of P/M examination.

(3.) After usual investigation, the accused persons were charge-sheeted for the offences as aforementioned. They denied their guilt and pleaded that the deceased was not of their caste. She was not married with their elder brother Sohansingh, but she was his Natra wife (customary marriage). According to them, the deceased was not of sound mind and oftenly she used to implicate them falsely and due to her conduct, the villagers were under fear and feeling terrorized. They have also submitted that because of mental weakness she has committed suicide. The appellants did not examine any witness in defence whereas the prosecution has examined 13 witnesses and also proved 25 documents in order to establish its case.