1985 Supreme(Raj) 806
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
G.M.Lodha, G.K.Sharma, JJ.
State of Rajasthan - Appellant
Versus
Smt. Lichma Devi - Respondent
D.B. Cr. Appeal No. 330 of 1978.
Decided On : 21-11-1985
Advocates:
For the Petitioner: Mr. G.C. Chatterji, P.P.
For the Respondent: Mr. N.L. Tibrewal, for accused.
Dying declarations are admissible in evidence under Section 32(1) of the Evidence Act, 1872, if they are made by a person who is in a fit state of mind and who believes that they are about to die.
Headnote:
CRIMINAL APPEAL - DOWRY DEATH - SECTION 302 IPC - DYING DECLARATION - SECTION 162 CRPC - EVIDENCE ACT - SECTION 6 - COURT ANALYSIS - CONVICTION - SENTENCING - SECTION 354(3) CRPC - PUBLIC HANGING
Fact of the Case:
The accused, Lichmadevi, was convicted of murdering her daughter-in-law, Pushpa, by pouring kerosene oil on her and setting her on fire. The trial court acquitted Lichmadevi, but the state appealed the decision. The prosecution's case was based on the dying declarations of Pushpa, the testimony of neighbors who witnessed the incident, and the medical evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court found that the trial court erred in rejecting the dying declarations of Pushpa. The court held that the dying declarations were made voluntarily and were corroborated by other evidence. The court also found that the testimony of the neighbors was credible and that the medical evidence supported the prosecution's case. The court concluded that Lichmadevi was guilty of murder and sentenced her to death.
Issues: 1. Whether the trial court erred in rejecting the dying declarations of Pushpa? 2. Whether the testimony of the neighbors was credible? 3. Whether the medical evidence supported the prosecution's case? 4. Whether Lichmadevi was guilty of murder?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the trial court erred in rejecting the dying declarations of Pushpa. The court found that the dying declarations were made voluntarily and were corroborated by other evidence. 2. The court found that the testimony of the neighbors was credible. The court noted that the neighbors had no motive to lie and that their testimony was consistent with the other evidence in the case. 3. The court found that the medical evidence supported the prosecution's case. The court noted that the medical evidence showed that Pushpa had died from burns that were consistent with being set on fire. 4. The court concluded that Lichmadevi was guilty of murder. The court found that Lichmadevi had the motive to kill Pushpa because Pushpa's family had not paid enough dowry. The court also found that Lichmadevi had the opportunity to kill Pushpa because she was alone with Pushpa at the time of the incident.
Final Decision: The High Court allowed the state's appeal and convicted Lichmadevi of murder. The court sentenced Lichmadevi to death.
JUDGMENT
1. - We are required to consider this appeal filed by the State of Rajasthan, against the acquittal of Smt. Lichmadevi, mother-in-law of deceased Pushpa, in what is alleged to be a most heinous, barbaric, cruel and gruesome murder by pouring kerosene oil and lighting fire on her; and locking her in the kitchen from outside by Smt. Lichmadevi, her mother-in-law, after ill-treatment on account of non-fulfillment of her expectations of dowry.
2. The trial court has come, to the conclusion that undoubtedly Pushpa died on account of burns sustained by her which were caused by homicidal act of putting kerosene oil on the body and lighting fire, which constitutes an offence under Section 302, IPC. However, while fixing liability for responsibility of this offence, the trial court was of the opinion that basing conviction on the dying declarations, would not be safe, and further that the evidence of the neighbours cannot be said to be wholly reliable.
3. Before we proceed to analyse the relevant evidence and consider the validity of the reasons given by the trial court for acquittal, it would be proper to mention in a nut-shell, the facts of the case as per the allegations of the prosecution.
4. Pushpa was daughter of Sitaram PW 9. She was married to Jagdish Prasad son of Smt. Lichmadevi. The relations in between Smt. Lichmadevi and Pushpa had become strained on account of alleged dowry-affair. Pushpa used to be harassed by her mother-in-law before she left her husband house and went to her father's house where she was staying with her father Sitaram. Only 4-5 days before this unfortunate incident When she is alleged to have been burnt to death, she came from her father's house to her father-in-law's house. On 29th Jan., 1977, at about 4-5 p.m. Pushpa was cleaning utensils on the roof of the house. Accused-Lichmadevi then lifted one 'Bagouha' (pan) and stuck it on the head of Pushpa (deceased). The accused is also alleged to have said that she was feeling like burning her alive after pouring kerosene oil on her.
5. In quick succession of the above event, in the night at about 8 O'clock, on that very terrace where there was a kitchen of tin-shed, the neighbours found flames of fire coming out therefrom, who also heard a cry, "bachao" "bachao" Bhanwarlal PW 3, who was working at his house nearby, then shouted and attracted the neighbours, who rushed and reached the house of Lichmadevi, and then climbed the terrace.
6. The crucial allegation is that the neighbours observed that the doors of the kitchen were closed, and there was a chain which locked and closed the doors from outside. Deendayal PW, 4 Lalit Kishore PW 5, Sushil Kumar PW 6 and Ors. who were neighbours, tried to open the door of the kitchen. Sushilkumar opened the chain from outside and he found that under the tin-shed, one woman was lying naked in severe condition of burning. She was then taken out, and it was found that she was none-else put Pushpa, wife of Jagdishprasad, who was suspected to be dead by that time. Therefore, the neighbours wanted to take her to hospital. The crudest act, as per the prosecution, did not stop at burning alive but at refusal of the accused and her other family members to take Pushpa to hospital.
7. Lalitkishore PW 5 took Pushpa to the SMS Hospital, and got her admitted to Emergency-Ward, wherefrom Pushpa was taken to Female-Ward 3AB. There, it is alleged that she gave her dying-declaration at about 5.30 a.m. next day, before PW 14 Sopsingh which was recorded as Ex.P 52. She stated therein that her mother-in-law had lit fire on her after pouring kerosene oil on her and burnt her. This dying-declaration was given to her father PW 9 Sitaram, PW 2 Rameshchandra and Lallulal PW 13. Lalitkishore, after getting her admitted to hospital came to the accused and her family members and asked them to make arrangements for blood as per doctor's advice. But, all the members of the accused-family refused to do anything in this regard. The accused asked J
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
