BIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dtd. 14/2/2005 passed by the Court of learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu (hereinafter to be referred as the trial court) in File No. 59/Sessions titled "State versus Bir Singh & Ors." by virtue of which the learned trial court has convicted the appellants for commission of offences under Ss. 302/498-A/149 RPC and have been sentenced to life imprisonment along with fine of Rs.5000.00 each, for commission of offence under sec. 302/149RPC and imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs.1,000.00 each for commission of offences under Ss. 498-A/149 RPC.

(2.) The appellants have impugned the judgment dtd. 14/2/2005 primarily on the ground that the dying declaration made by the deceased before the Police was shrouded with mystery and was doubtful and further that there are material contradictions in the prosecution evidence, those have been ignored by the learned trial court. It is also stated that none of the witnesses deposed anything about the appellant No. 2 (husband of the deceased), who had suffered 20% burns while saving his wife i.e. the deceased, but the learned trial court has not considered this vital aspect of the case. In nutshell, the contention of the appellants is that the learned trial court has not rightly appreciated the evidence. Contentions of Appellants:

(3.) Mr. Sunil Sethi, learned senior counsel along with Mr. S. K. Anand, learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that the dying declaration allegedly made by the deceased-Sita Devi was manipulated by the Police in connivance with the parents and brothers of the deceased and in fact, the deceased was not in a fit state of mind to make any dying declaration, as she had suffered 100% burns. They further argued that even there is no evidence with regard to the fact that the deceased was treated with cruelty and further there are material contradictions between the statements of the mother, brothers and sister-in-law of the deceased, but the learned trial court has not appreciated the same. It was also urged that no independent witness has been associated by the Investigating Officer to show that the deceased was treated with cruelty by the appellants and only interested and related witnesses have been associated with the investigation and they only have deposed against the appellants. Mr. Sethi submitted that the appellant No. 1, Bir Singh has already passed away. Mr. S. K. Anand has produced the medical certificate of appellant No. 3 (mother-in-law) to demonstrate that she is suffering from old age ailments. Contentions of respondent: