AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Appellant is aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and sentence handed down by the Sessions Judge, Bhopal in Sessions Trial No. 108/1993, whereby he has been found guilty of having committed murder of his wife Kishwarbai.
The date of the incident is 24.1.1993 at about 9.30 pm in Bair - agarh in District Bhopal. The pro - secution case in short is that on the date of incident appellant re - turned home after taking alcohol. His wife Kishwarbai scolded him, en - raged appellant gave a slap and then poured kerosene on her and set her on fire. She was taken to the Police Station Bairagarh where she lodged FIR Ex.P.13. Then she was taken to Hamidia Hospital, Bhopal where she examined and MLC was recorded by Dr. Anoop Dube (PW12). Naib Tashildar Nis- ar Ahmad Rizvi (PW8), recorded the Dying Declaration (Ex.P.12) at about 2 am in the night, soon after the incident, in the question and answer form. Before re- cording the dying declaration, Dr. Punit Dixit (PW13) examined her and certi- fied that the patient was in a fit mental condition to give the dying declaration. Kishwarbai succumbed to burn injuries on 31.1.1993, therefore, a case under Section 302 of the IPC was registered against the appellant and after complet- ing the investigation charge sheet was filed and appellant put to trial for an offence punishable under section 302 of the I.P.C.
Appellant abjured his guilt. In the trial Court, prosecution examined 13 wit- nesses to bring home the charge. Appel- lant examined two witnesses in defence. After considering the prosecution evid- ence, the trial Court found appellant guilty of the charge and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with fine default stipulations.
Counsel for the appellant submitted before us that no case has been made out against the appellant and he has wrongly been convicted by the trial Court. The conviction of the appellant, therefore, is unsustainable in law and he deserves to be acquitted.
On the other hand, Panel Lawyer ap- pearing for the State submitted that there are no merit and substance in the appeal.
After having heard the rival submis- sions and considering the evidence on re- cord, we find there is no substance in this appeal.
Besides FIR Ex. P/13, which was promptly lodged by the deceased herself, there is a dying declaration Ex.P./12 re- corded by the Naib Tahsildar Nisar Ahmad Rizvi P.W.8 after Dr. Punit Dixit(PW13) certified that the patient was in a fit mental condition to give the statement. The said dying declaration is Ex. P/12, which was recorded soon after the incid- ent. From the evidence on record, it is clear that the incident took place at around 9.30 pm in the night. Soon there- after deceased herself lodged the FIR Ex.P/13 and her dying declaration Exp/12 was recorded by Nisar Ahmad Rizvi Naib Tehsildar when she was medically and men- tally fit to give the statement regarding circumstances having proximate relation with the transaction which resulted in her death.
In view of the evidence on record, we find that the appellant is the author of the crime and was rightly convicted by the trial Court for having committed of- fence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC. We, therefore, find no merit and substance in the appeal.
The appeal is dismissed and the judg- ment of conviction and sentence awarded by the trial Court is hereby affirmed.
Ordered accordingly.