The Court emphasized the necessity for strict adherence to procedural norms for dying declarations, highlighting that lack of corroborative evidence and questioning health conditions of the victim undermined the conviction.

Judgment :

Dr. Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J.

1. The instant criminal appeal under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the accused-appellant against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 03.09.2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Women Atrocities Cases, Jodhpur Metropolitan in Sessions Case No.22/2013 (State of Rajasthan Vs. Jakir Hussain), whereby the accused-appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under:

2. The matter pertains to an incident which had occurred in the year 2012 and the present appeal has been pending since the year 2013.

3. Brief facts of this case, as placed before this Court are that one Liyakat (complainant) alongwith his younger brother Maqbool Ali submitted a written report (Ex.P-5) on 08.02.2012, at around 12:30 p.m., before the Police Station, Pratap Nagar, Jodhpur, stating therein that his sister, Aasfa had been married for 22 years and was living in her matrimonial home situated at Shramikpura, Masuriya, Jodhpur, with her husband, namely, Jakir Hussain (present accused-appellant) and in-laws, who used to subject her to grave acts of cruelty including beatings.

3.1. It was further stated in the report that in continuation of such cruel acts, on 07.02.2012, at around 11:00 p.m., the husband and in-laws of Aasfa, set her on fire, information whereof, was received by the complainant (family member of Aasfa) at around 12:15 a.m. As alleged in the report, Aasfa received burns to the extent of 90%. As per the report, in the said act, present accused-appellant Jakir (husband), Bibi w/o Babu Khan (mother-in-law) and Yasmin d/o Babu Khan (sister-in-law), were involved.

3.2. On the basis of the aforesaid information, an FIR bearing No.67/2012 was registered at Police Station, Pratap Nagar, Jodhpur for the offence under Sections 498-A and 307 IPC, and the police started investigation in the matter. However, before conclusion of the investigation, Aasfa succumbed to the burn injuries during the treatment on 18.02.2012. After completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet under Section 498(a) and 302 IPC against accused-appellant was submitted before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.2, Jodhpur.

3.3. Owing to the nature of crime involved, the matter was committed to the Court of Sessions, wherefrom the same was transferred to the learned Trial Court, for the necessary trial.

3.4. During the course of trial, the statements of 24 witnesses (P.W. 1 to P.W. 24) were recorded, and documents (Ex.P.1 to 22) got exhibited on behalf of the prosecution; in defence, document (Ex.D.1) got exhibited, for examination; whereafter, the accused- appellant was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., in which he pleaded innocence and false implication in the criminal case in question.

3.5. After conclusion of the trial, the learned Trial Court, convicted and sentenced the accused-appellant, as above, vide the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 03.09.2013; against which, the present appeal has been preferred by the accused-appellant.

4. Mr. Harshvardhan Thanvi, learned Amicus Curiae for the accused-appellant contended that the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 03.09.2013 is not sustainable in law, as the learned Trial Court failed to properly consider and appreciate