(1.) The State of Rajasthan is in appeal against the judgment dtd. 4/1/2001 acquitting Dharamraj S/o Manna Lal and Satyanarain S/o Manna Lal (respondents). The complainant- Ranglal S/o Gangaram has filed revision against acquittal.
(2.) The facts as set up by the prosecution are that after recording parcha bayan of Amita (hereinafter referred to as 'deceased'), on report of Sub Divisional Magistrate, Kishangarh (SDM), FIR No.318/1999 was lodged at Police Station Madanganj, District Ajmer under Ss. 143, 307, 120-B IPC and later on Sec. 302 IPC was added. The deceased stated that on the night of 6/9/1999 at around 3:00 am she alongwith her sister Pushpa were sleeping in the courtyard of house of Pushpa when Dharamraj (husband of the deceased), Satyanarain-brother-in-law (devar), Moolchand- brother-in-law (jeth), Govindram- brother-in-law (nandoi), Shanti - sister-in-law (jethani), Vimla- sister-in-law (nanad) and Mangi- sister-in-law (devrani) came, her husband from a container (in which kerosene oil is stored 'hereinafter referred to as container') poured kerosene and Satyanarain (brother-in-law) lit fire with matchbox. She was taken to YN Hospital, Kishangarh at around 5:00 am and her statement was recorded. She was referred to SMS Hospital, Jaipur where she succumbed to injuries on 11/9/1999. The postmortem was conducted. The cause of death was determined due to septicemic shock as a result of extensive antemortem burn injuries which were sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. The charge-sheet was filed against Dharamraj, Satyanarain, Govindram, Shanti, Vimla and Mangi. The prosecution recorded statement of twenty one witnesses and exhibited twenty six documents. In the statement recorded under Sec. 313 Cr.P.C., it was stated to be a case of false implication.
(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant submitted that statement of deceased read with testimony of PW-17 Pushpa proved that respondents had burned the deceased.