BITTO BEE Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure being aggrieved by the judgment dated 04.09.2009 passed by the IV Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal in S.T. No.120/2009, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under :

(2.) In brief the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that on 22.04.2018 deceased Rani W/o Shamim (PW-3) and the daughterin-law of the appellant was admitted in the Hamidia Hospital, Bhopal by her sister Anisha Bee (PW-1) and brother Rehman. As per the treating doctor - Dr. S.K. Ahirwar (PW-8) she was burnt by acid by her husband around eight days ago as she had acid burn injuries on various parts of her body. On an intimation to the police, Dehati Nalishi (Ex.P/5) was recorded by Sub Inspector - Akhtar Ali (PW-5) and subsequently FIR (Ex.P/7) was lodged under Section 324 and 498-A of IPC. The dying declaration of the deceased was also recorded through Executive Magistrate and Naib Tehsildar Smt Saroj Agniwanshi (PW-9). The learned Judge of the Trial Court after recording the evidence has convicted the appellant the mother-in-law of the deceased as above and being aggrieved by the same, this appeal has been preferred by the appellant.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the impugned judgment is contrary to law and facts on record. The counsel has further submitted that contradictory version of the prosecution story has been brought on record by the prosecution itself and as such the benefit of doubt ought to have been given to the appellant/accused. It is further stated that on one hand as per report Ex.P/14 prepared by Dr. S.K. Ahirwar (PW-8) it is stated that the injured had given her statement that her husband has caused the injuries by acid whereas on the other hand in the Dehati Nalshi (Ex.P/5) recorded by Akhtar Ali Khan (PW-5) at the instance of deceased Rani it is stated that the injuries have been caused by the mother-in-law of the deceased and subsequently vide dying declaration Ex.P/15 dated 23.04.2008 also which is recorded by the Naib Tehsildar and Executive Magistrate Saroj Agnivanshi (PW-9) it is stated that her mother-in-law i.e. the appellant-accused had caused burn injuries by acid. The counsel has further submitted that there is material discrepancies between the statements of the deceased hence no reliance can be placed on such evidence of dubious nature. It is further submitted that the deceased was admitted in the hospital on 22.04.2008, her dying declaration was recorded on 23.04.2008 and she died on 06.08.2008 after around four months and as such the imputation of alleged murder is based on the concocted story of the prosecution.