PARAMJIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed against the judgment of the trial Court dated 13.08.2001 whereby the appellant has been convicted under Sections 498 -A & 304 -B IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of 10 years.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution was that the deceased Malkiat Kaur was married to the appellant on 26.07.1998. On 12.08.1998 at 4.30 P.M. the appellant -Paramjit Singh proceeded to bring milk from the market for preparing tea and when he came back, he started quarreling with Malkiat Kaur. Thereafter he started abusing her and asking her to bring money from her parents. On this Malkiat Kaur told him that her parents are poor persons and they had already given whatever they could give and now they were not in a position to give more. On this, the deceased -Paramjit Singh brought kerosene oil container, sprinkled the kerosene on the body of Malkiat Kaur and put her on fire. While burning, Malkiat Kaur came out in the street raising alarm on which large number of people collected and they extinguished the fire. Then the appellant brought his wife Malkiat Kaur in the Civil Hospital, Nabha, and got her admitted there. The statement of Malkiat Kaur was recorded in the presence of Naib Tehsildar. It was read over to said Malkiat Kaur. She admitted the same to be correct and thumb marked it. On its basis a case under Sections 307/498 -A IPC was registered against the appellant. During the investigation, the said Malkiat Kaur died on 14.08.1998. After necessary formalities the appellant was sent for trial and ultimately found guilty and convicted. Hence the present appeal.

(3.) LEARNED Assistant Advocate General, on the other hand has argued that mere fact that the appellant took his wife to the hospital would not tend to exculpate him because that could well have been a ploy to save himself from the charges of having killed her. As regards the argument that the deceased could not have made a dying declaration, the learned Assistant Advocate General has argued that in the present case the doctor had specifically opined that she was fit to make the statement, the statement was recorded in the presence of the doctor and the Executive Magistrate also testified that she had recorded the statement and was convinced from all the attendant circumstances that the deceased was fit to make the statement. As regards the allegation that the deceased had made two separate statements he has argued that there is a possibility that the statement recorded in the bed head ticket viz, the complainant gave complete history of alleged occurrence while saying that her husband had gone to take milk; could have been the version given by the husband at that time and, in any case this unconfirmed statement could never out weigh the dying declaration.