USMAN Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON 26 -2 -71 Usman appellant was convicted by the learned Sessions Judge, Jodhpur, of an offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life.

(2.) THE deceased Rukia was the wife of the accused. The couple were married about a year before the incident giving rise to the present cafe. It appears that on 21 -4 -70 Mst. Rukia had a quarrel with the sister of her husband, who bad beaten her. The parents of Usman were not happy with Usman as he was not earning and was being felt as a burden by the parents. Some time in the evening of 21 -4 -70 when Usman came home, his wife Rukia complained to him about the mis -behaviour of her sister -in -law. It appears that Usman did not take kindly to this complaint and he thought of finishing Rukia. He obtained kerosene oil from a shop through his sister. The kerosene oil was then pouted on the person of Rukia and Usman set fire to Rukia's clothes with a matchstick. As a result, Rukia sustained severe burns. She cried and this attracted her mother -in law and a few neighbours. P.W. 6 Riyaz -Mohamed, P.W. 7 Mohd. Ali and P.W. 8 Abdul Rashid, on the scene, Rukia was removed to the M.G.. Hospital She was admitted by Dr. Parihar who had been examined as D.W. 4. He treated her and then informed the Udaimandir Police about this. The couple were residing at Udaimandir, Jodhpur, at a short distance from the Police Station. The information that was conveyed from the hospital was recorded by P.W. 11 Shri Ganpatraj Bhandari, SHO, Udaimandir Police Station, in the roznamcha. Shri Bhandan then proceeded to the hospital. He recorded a dying declaration of Rukia Ex. P. 13 on record. He found that Rukia was in bad shape though she was quite conscious & able to make a statement. Shri Bhandari asked one of this subordinates to arrange to bring a Magistrate for the recording of a dying declaration of Rukia, Dr. S.K. Pathak PW. 12, the medico -jurist at the M.G. Hospital, was also there. Dr. Pathak waited for sometime for the arrival of the Magistrate but finding that the Magistrate had not come, he on his own recorded another statement of Rukia, Ex. P. 10 on record. Shri Parasmal, a First Class Magistrate, PW. 14, also reached the hospital after some time and he too recorded Rukia's statement. It is Ex. P. 15 on recorded. Rukia died the next morning. The post mortem was done by Dr. S.K. Pathak who found the following injuries on Rukia's body:

(3.) The prosecution case rested on the three dying declarations recorded by Shri Ganpatraj Bhandri, Dr. S.K. Pathak and Shri Parasmal respectively. The learned Sessions Judge scrutinised the evidence regarding the dying declarations and held that the evidence relating to the dying declarations was reliable and these dying declarations were credible and in the light of the surrounding circumstances, could be taken to be sufficient for convening the accused.