PAKIYA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal seeks to challenge the conviction of the appellant Pakiya recorded by the learned Sessions Judge, Jalore vide impugned judgment dated 10.12.1998 for the offence under Sections 302 and 498A I.P.C. sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 1000/- , In default of payment of fine to undergo two months' simple imprisonment on the first count, while sentencing him to undergo two years S.I. and a fine of Rs. 500/-, In default of payment of fine to undergo one month simple imprisonment on the second count. Both the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the appellant Pakiya was married to the deceased Savita some three years before the occurrence. According to prosecution whenever the deceased used to come to her parents house, she used to complain against the appellant, about his persistent demand for money, as the appellant was alleged to be alcoholic. It is in this background that on 29.3.1996 a first report was lodged by Peera, father of the deceased, recapitulating the above background, and alleging that he had gone to Ahmadabad for treatment of his son, whose hand was chewed by camel. On return from Ahmedabad he was informed by his nephew Moola Ram, that his daughter Savita is admitted in the hospital on account of having received bum injuries. According to this report when the informant went to see her along with his cousin Bhikha Ram, he was Informed by the deceased that the deceased does not know as to what she disclosed earlier, but the correct fact is that she has been burnt by her husband. According to the report the entire head, neck, 'etc. were burnt. On this report a case under Section 498A I.P.C. was registered vide E1.A. Ex.P-2 formally chalked report being Ex. P-3. Thereafter on 18.4.1996 further report was submitted by Peera being Ex.P-4 to the effect that he got the victim discharged from the hospital some 15 days back, and the victim has expired on 17.4.1996 at about 5 PM., and that she has been cremated. It is in the investigation of the report Ex.P-2/P-3 that the appellant was arrested vide Ex.P-6 on 1.4.1996, the investigation was finally completed, and a challan was filed against the appellant for the offence under Sections 307, 326, and 498A I.P.C. However, after furnishing the report Ex.P-4 a further charge sheet was filed for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. Thereafter the case was committed to the learned trial court.

(3.) The learned trial court framed the charges for the offence under Section 498A and 302 I.P.C. The appellant denied the charges. In trial, the learned trial Judge recorded the statement of 12 witnesses on the side of the prosecution, apart from taking on record the documentary evidence. Then statement of accused were recorded under Section 313 Cr.PC. The explanation offered by the appellant was that the deceased had given wrong statement at the behest of her parents. According to the appellant he got her admitted in the hospital, and got her treated. He denied the allegation of ill-treatment being meted to the deceased. In defence the accused examined D.W. 1 Prema Ram, the officer who had recorded another dying declaration dated 10.2.1996 Ex.D-1.