RASEEDA @ RAASEDA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Raseeda @ Raasida and Rajeeda, the appellants herein, were found guilty under section 302/34 IPC for having committed murder of Akhtari Begum. They were sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and fine by the learned trial Judge. Challenge in the instant appeal is the said judgment of learned trial Judge.

(2.) The conviction of appellants is primarily based on the dying declaration of Akhtari Begum. In cases of homicide, statements made by a person, since deceased are admissible to prove the case and circumstances of the man's death. Such statements are called 'dying declaration'. The admittedly of "dying declaration" rests on the principle that a sense of impending death produces in a man's mind the same feeling as that of a conscientious and virtuous man under oath-'NEMO MORITURUS PRAESUMUNTUR MENTIRI". The general principle on which this species of evidence is admitted is that they are declarations made in extremity, when every motive to falsehood is silenced and the mind induced by the most powerful considerations to speak the truth; a situation so solemn and so awful is considered by the law creating on obligation equal to that which is imposed by a positive oath administered in a court of justice.

(3.) It is the prosecution case that informant Abdul Hafeej on January 1, 1996 submitted a written report at Police Station Jawahar Nagar Jaipur stating therein that his sister Akhtari Begum was married to Abdul Jabbar 16 years back at Delhi. She suddenly eloped with one Lal Khan along with her children and despite his best efforts he was not able to find out her whereabouts. It was on December 29, 1995 that one Saleem telephonically informed him that Akhtari Begum had been burnt alive and was admitted to the Hospital at Jaipur. Informant than reached to Jaipur and found Akhtari Begum badly burnt. On that report a case under Section 302 I.P.C. was registered and investigation commenced. Statements of Akhtari Begum got recorded by Magistrate, necessary memos were drawn and after completion of investigation charge sheet was filed. In due course the case came up for trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 2 Jaipur City Jaipur. Charges under Sections 302 and 34 I.P.C. were framed against the appellants, who denied the charges and claimed trial. The prosecution in support of its case examined as may as 14 witnesses. In the explanation under Section 313 Cr.P.C. the appellants claimed innocence. Three witness in defence were examined. Learned trial Judge on hearing final submissions convicted and sentenced the appellants as indicated herein above.