TARU RAM Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal arises out of the following facts :

(2.) THE prosecution in support of its case examined inter alia, P.W. 1 Tirlok Chand, Anjali's maternal uncle, who had brought her up and had also arranged and solemnised her marriage, stated to the demands for dowry made from him by the accused; P.W. 2 Ravinder Singh, Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar, who had recorded the dying declaration (Exh. PD) after the deceased had been declared fit to make a statement by Dr. Gurpal Singh (P.W. 3); P.W. 5 ASI Dilbagh Singh, who had recorded the first dying declaration, leading to the registration of the F.I.R.; P.W. 6 Dr. S.P. Goel, who had performed the post -mortem examination on the dead body and opined that the injuries found on her person were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature; and P.W. 7 Dr. Sukhvinder Singh Gill of the Dayanand Medical College and Hospital, Ludhiana, who stated that Anjali had been admitted to the hospital on July 28, 1996 at 1.50 p.m. and that she had voluntarily given the information, which had been recorded in the M.L.R. which was that she had been burnt by her father -in -law.

(3.) THE Trial Court held that the entire case rested on the three dying declarations made by the deceased, one to ASI Dilbagh Singh (P.W. 5), which had led to the registration of the F.I.R., a second to Sh. Ravinder Singh, JMIC, Jalandhar (P.W. 2) on July 27,1996 at 6.05 p.m., and the third before Dr. Sukhvinder Singh Gill (P.W. 7), who stated that at the time of her admission in the Dayanand Medical College and Hospital, Ludhiana on July 28,1996 Anjali had told him (which he had recorded in her M.L.R.) that she had been burnt by her father -in -law.