IMPORTANT POINT
Fardbeyan cannot be treated as dying declaration of deceased due to such a long gap between its recording and subsequent death of deceased.

JUDGMENT

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Addl. P.P. for the State.

2. This appeal arises out of the Judgment of conviction dated 21.02.2007 and Order of sentence dated 24.02.2007, passed by the learned 18th Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi, in S.T. No. 620 of 2003, whereby the sole appellant has been found guilty and convicted for the offences under Sections 436 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Upon hearing on the point of sentence, the appellant has been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and rigorous imprisonment for ten years for the offence under Section 436 of the Indian Penal Code, and both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

3. The prosecution case was instituted on the basis of fardbeyan of the deceased Sarful Ansari, recorded while he was alive, at RIMS, Ranchi, on 18.04.2003, where he was undergoing treatment. In his fardbeyan he has stated that in the night of 16.04.2003, he was sleeping in his house along with his first wife Sahnaz Khatoon and second wife Sabila Khatoon, (the accused) and when the informant and his first wife slept, the accused Sabila Khatoon, sprinkling K. Oil on the bed and bodies of her husband and first wife, put them to fire and fled away, stealing Rs. 25,000/- from a box. When they started burning the husband came out from the room breaking open the door and raised alarm, whereupon, the persons nearby came and put off the fire and both the husband and wife were brought to RIMS, Ranchi, where they were admitted on 16.04.2003. On the basis of the fardbeyan of the informant Sarful Ansari, Mandar P.S. Case No. 24 of 2003, corresponding to G.R. No. 1420 of 2003, was instituted for the offences under Sections 324, 326, 307 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code and investigation was taken up. The informant and his first wife subsequently died due to burn injuries, and Section 302 of the Indian Penal code was added. After investigation, the police submitted the charge-sheet in the case against the accused Sabila Khatoon.

4. After commitment of the case to the Court of Session, charge was framed against the accused Sabila Khatoon for the offence under sections 436 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code, and upon the accused’s pleading not guilty and claiming to be tried, she was put to trial. In course of trial, the prosecution has examined eleven witnesses, out of whom P.W.-6 Pankharasiyus Toppo has turned hostile and has not supported the case of prosecution. The Investigating Officer of the case has also not been examined and the fardbeyan and F.I.R. have been proved as Ext.5 and Ext.4 respectively, by the formal witnesses, P.W.-10 Badri Prasad, an Advocate Clerk and P.W.-11 Rajesh Mandal, an A.S.I. of police. Doctor examining the deceased persons while they were alive, and the Doctor conducting the post-mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased lady, have also not been examined by the prosecution.

5. P.W.-3 Satan Ansari is the father of the deceased Sarful Ansari. He has stated that his younger son Sarful Ansari was sleeping in his house on 16.04.2003 along with his two wives. At about 2 to 2.30 A.M. in the night there was a noise from his room and when he went to the room, he found the room bolted from outside and Sarful Ansari and his wife were inside the room. He opened the door and went inside the room and found that Sarful Ansari and his first wife were on fire. He and his another son put off the fire and by that time other persons also reached there. Both of them were taken to Police Station and they were also taken to hospital. His son remained in the hospital for 3 months and when his condition started deteriorating, he was brought to house, where he died. His daughter-in-law was also taken to her house by her father, where she also died. He has stated that his son had given his statement in the Police Station, where he put his signature on it, and he has identified his signature on