The main legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between 'murder' and 'culpable homicide not amounting to murder' under the Indian Penal Code, and the emphasis on the reformative and corrective approach in criminal jurisprudence.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Abhishek Mayank, learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. Though the matter is listed for hearing application for enlargement on bail we with consent of counsels heard the matter as record is before this Court. It is not disputed that the accused is in jail since 5.12.2009, so heard finally.

2. This appeal challenges the judgment and order dated 27.10.2020 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.3, Aligarh in Sessions Trial No.459 of 2010 convicting accused-appellant for commission of offence under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC') and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.20,000/- and in default of payment of fine, further to undergo imprisonment for one year.

3. Brief facts as culled out from the record are that on 01.06.2009 sister of complainant Tejpal Singh got married with accused Dharam Singh. He gave sufficient dowry in the marriage. However, Dharam Singh (husband of the deceased) and her in-laws were not satisfied with the dowry given in the marriage. On 02.11.2009, the complainant received a phone call from his elder sister Urmesh that her sister was burnt alive by her in-laws. On that information, complainant and his father reached the village Sahara Kala where his sister was found in burnt condition but her in-laws were not present at their house. Victim disclosed in front of informant that at 5:00 A.M her husband Dharam Singh, elder brother-in-law (Jeth) Raju and brother-in-law Rambabu tried to burn her to death. Complainant went with his sister who was in being treated in burns ward for medical treatment at Government Hospital, Iglas. On 11.11.2019, during the treatment, Radha died. On the basis of the above complaint, the First Information Report was lodged which culminated into the charge-sheet being laid against the accused-appellant, Dharam Singh under Section 302, 498A and 201 of I.P.C.

4. On being summoned, the accused pleaded not guilty and wanted to be tried. The offence for which accused was charged was triable by the Court of Sessions, hence, the accused-appellant was committed to the Court of Sessions. The learned Sessions Judge framed charge under Section 302 of I.P.C.

5. The Trial started and the prosecution examined 9 witnesses who are as follows :

6. In support of ocular version following documents were filed :

7. At the end of the trial and after recording the statement of the accused under section 313 of Cr.P.C., and hearing arguments on behalf of prosecution and the defence, the learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellant as mentioned above.

8. The accused is in jail since 05.12.2009. On 23.11.2020, this Court had passed orders directing the State counsel to file counter affidavit, if any, to application for enlargement on bail. Unfortunately, for a period of two years this matter was not listed. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the judgment of Criminal Appeal No. 308/2022 (Saudan Singh V