JUDGMENT :

A.M. Badar, J.

By this appeal, appellant/original accused no.1 Navlakho Devi who happens to be mother-in-law of deceased Lalita Devi is challenging the Judgment and Order dated 18th April, 1995 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VIII, Patna, in Sessions Trial No.205 of 1994 thereby convicting her of the offence punishable under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing her to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life.

2. The facts projected from the police report leading to the prosecution of appellant/original accused no.1 Navlakho Devi can be summarized thus:

(a). Lalita Devi (since deceased) married acquitted accused no.2 Madan Prasad and had started cohabiting with him in the house of her in-laws. Appellant/convicted accused Navlakho Devi is mother of acquitted accused no.2 Madan Prasad.

(b). According to the prosecution case, on 15.02.1993, Lalita Devi was taking food at 12.00 O’ clock in the night. At that time, appellant/accused no.1 Navlakho Devi came near her, started abusing her, pulled her Saree, sprinkled kerosene oil on her person and set Lalita Devi on fire by a burning matchstick. Lalita Devi sustained burn injuries in this incident and then she was taken to the hospital of Dr. Shushil Kumar Singh at Khagaul. During the course of her medical treatment at the said hospital, other accused persons (who came to be acquitted) started threatening her to disclose that she sustained burns because of her own fault or else poisonous injection shall be administered to her. After her medical treatment for few days at the hospital of Dr. Shushil Kumar Singh P.W.4, Lalita Devi came to be discharged and was taken to her parental house by her parental relatives. According to the prosecution case, nobody from her matrimonial side came to visit her during her stay at her parental house. As her condition deteriorated, her brother Binod Kumar P.W.3 got her admitted to the P.M.C.H. Hospital, Patna, on 05.03.1993. Nobody from her matrimonial side attended her in that hospital. According to the prosecution case, appellant/convicted accused Navlakho Devi and Madan Prasad (acquitted accused) used to threaten Lalita Devi to bring gold Nathuni (nose ring) with a consequential threat that on failure she would not be allowed to stay in her matrimonial house.

(c). During her medical treatment at the P.M.C.H. Hospital, Patna, Court Witness No.1 Rajnath Singh, a Police Officer from Pirbahore Police Station, recorded statement of Lalita Devi (since deceased) at the P.M.C.H. Hospital, Patna, on 13.03.1993 in presence of her brother P.W.3 Binod Kumar and on the basis of that statement, Crime No.21 of 1993 came to be registered against accused persons on 14.03.1993. Ultimately, during her medical treatment, Lalita Devi wife of Madan Prasad succumbed to burn injuries and P.W.6 Dr. Awadheshwari Prasad Narain Deo conducted autopsy on the dead body of Lalita Devi on 28.03.1993 at the P.M.C.H. Hospital, Patna, and concluded that she died due to antimortem burn injuries.

(d). Routine investigation followed. Statement of the witnesses came to be recorded and ultimately the Investigating Officer had filed charge-sheet against appellant/accused no.1 Navlakho Devi and other accused persons for the offence punishable under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code.

(e). On committal, the learned trial court framed the charges for the offence punishable under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code against the accused persons. They pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

3. In support of the prosecution case, the prosecution has examined two neighbourers of the deceased Lalita Devi namely P.W.1 Laxman Das and P.W.2 Dev Prasad Pandit. Brother of Lalita Devi namely Binod Kumar came to be examined as P.W.3. Dr. Shushil Kumar Singh of Khagaul who gave medical treatment to Lalita Devi came to be examined as P.W.4. The Investigating Officer Ranjeet Prasad Sinha is examined as P.W.5. Autopsy Surgeon Awadheshwari Prasad Narain Deo of the P.M.C.H.