SUIT MANGI BAI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED Judl. Magistrate, First Class, has taken cognizance of an offence u/s 302 IPC against the petitioner vide order dated 4-11-80. He has directed issue of non-bailable warrants against the petitioner.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the case of the prosecution is that petitioner's son Babu Lal was married to deceased Smt. Ladi. was living with her husband at the relevant time. On 6-6-80, she was admitted to General Hospital, Udaipur, with extensive burns on her body. She was treated by Dr. , A. S. Gupta assisted by Dr. Radhey Shyam Sharma and nurse Smt. Bharti Prior to her treatment, she was seen by Dr. J. K. Rohat. She stated to, Dr. Rohat that she was preparing tea and she was burnt by accident. Dr. A. S. Gupta did not make any enquiries from her but Dr. R. S. Sharma who prepared the bad head ticket and enquired from her and she repeated the same story to him also. Later on, she was examined by Dr. Dharmendra Sharma for her injuries and she maintained this very version before him. Later on, when her condition become serious, her statement was got recorded by a Magistrate and in the statement made to the Magistrate, she alleged that her mother-in-law, the present peti-tioner had poured kerosene on her and had struck a match stick and burnt her because of ill will. The police after enquiry registered a case u/ss 307 and 326 IPC and altered it to one u/s 302 IPC since Smt. Ladi died of the burns received by her. After investigations, the police put up a final report but the learned Judl. Magistrate, Udaipur, on the basis of the dying declaration of Smt. Ladi made before Addl. Civil and Chief Judl. Magistrate, Udaipur, took cognizance of offence u/s 302 IPC and directed issue of warrants.

(3.) IN the present case, I find that there was some evidence before the learned Magistrate on the basis of such cognizance could have been taken. If the dying declaration of Smt. Ladi made before the learned Addl. Chief Judl. Magistrate remains as it is then, prima facie a case u/s 302 IPC is made out against the petitioner for the purpose of taking cognizance. I find that the order of the Magistrate taking cognizance against the petitioner is thus perfectly just and proper.