RAJVENDRA @ RAJVIND Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal under Sec. 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. has been filed by the appellant, being aggrieved by the judgment dtd. 12/05/2016 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Damoh, District Damoh (M.P.) in S.T. No. 100069/2015, whereby the learned trial Court convicted the appellant under Sec. 302 of the IPC and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.3,000.00, and in default of payment of fine, to undergo additional rigorous imprisonment for six months.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant submits that, in the present case, the prosecution story in brief is that on 11/2/2013 at 03:10 p.m., the deceased, Maya Bai, was admitted to District Hospital, Damoh, by her father-in-law Mitthu for treatment of burn injuries. She had sustained 100% burn injuries. During her treatment, her dying declaration was recorded by the Naib Tehsildar. She stated that her husband had an illicit relationship with one Kamla Bai. When she objected to it, the accused beat her. On 11/2/2013 at about 12:00 p.m., they had an altercation, during which the accused poured kerosene on her and set her ablaze. Her father-in-law Mitthu and neighbor Geeta Bai took her to the District Hospital. At the hospital, the police recorded a Dehati Nalishi based on her statement. The police also recorded her statement under Sec. 161 of the Cr.P.C. She died at about 09:30 p.m. on the same day. Thereafter, an FIR was registered under Sec. 302 of the IPC against the accused at Police Station Hindoriya. After investigation, a charge-sheet was filed and the accused was arrested. It is submitted that there are numerous contradictions and omissions in the depositions of the prosecution witnesses. The prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and therefore, the benefit of doubt should be given to the accused. In these circumstances, the judgment passed by the trial Court deserves to be set aside and the appellant be acquitted of the aforesaid charge.

(3.) Shri Arvind Singh, learned Public Prosecutor for the State supported the judgment of conviction passed by the trial Court.