RAMESH CHANDRA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. against the order dt. 30.1.1996 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Rajsamand in Cr. Regular Case No. 14/96 pending in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajsamand.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as counsel for non-petitioner No. 2 Smt. Tamu Bai and the learned Public Prosecutor.

(3.) IN this citation word "abetment" as used in Section 107 IPC has been considered to mean that a person abets the doing of a thing who firstly instigates any person to do a thing, or secondly, engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing, or thirdly, intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing. The dying declaration was considered keeping in view of this provision. It was held that neither of the ingredients of abetment are attracted on the statement of the deceased. Therefore, the accused-appellant was acquitted from the offence under Section 306 IPC. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that statement of Smt. Lila which comes within the definition of dying declaration is that her mother-in-law used to abuse her and her parents every day and quarrelled, she was not in a position to do agricultural work. She was married 8 years ago. She used to do agricultural work for two or two and a half years. Thereafter she stopped doing so. Her mother-in-law was not happy. On the day of incident her mother-in-law abused her parents which she could not tolerate; therefore, she poured kerosene oil on herself and burnt.