IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ATUL SREEDHARAN &

HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE ANURADHA SHUKLA th ON THE 5 OF MAY, 2025 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1349 of 2004 SANJIDA BEGUM AND OTHERS Versus THE STATE OF M.P.

Appearance:

None for the appellants.

Ms. Anuradha Patel - Advocate for the complainant/Objector.

Shri Ajay Tamrakar - Government Advocate for the respondents/State.

ORDER Per: Justice Atul Sreedharan The appeal is listed today for a report on the execution of warrant issued against appellant no.4 who is absconding in this case. The appeal is of the year 2004 and the incident is of 2002. None appears on behalf of the appellants. Ms. Anuradha Patel, learned counsel appears on behalf of the complainant/Objector and Shri Ajay Tamrakar, learned counsel appears for the State. As the appeal is of the year 2002, this Court decided to hear the learned counsel for the complainant and the State to ascertain if interference with the judgment of the learned trial Court was required. If such interference was not called for and the order was to be sustained, then the necessity of hearing the appellant's counsel would be essential.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRIYANKA

2. According to the learned counsel for the complainant and the State, an incident took place on 19.09.2002 due to which the deceased Rabia bi suffered burn injuries due to which she died 11 days later on 30.09.2002. Initially, she was treated at the Government Hospital, Katni and her MLC was prepared on 19.09.2002 itself at 12:30 p.m. The MLC records that the scalp hair was partially burned and there were superficial to deep burn injuries which were present on the face and neck and both upper limbs, chest and back of chest, butt, thigh and lateral aspect of both legs of the deceased. It also records that the deceased was conscious, but her pulse was feeble, and the systolic blood pressure was less than 60 mm Hg. It further records that she was admitted for treatment and expert opinion was also called for. This document has been exhibited as Exhibit-D/12 (PW-1). Thereafter, at Katni itself, a dying declaration was recorded of deceased on 19.09.2002 at 7:15 p.m. at the Government Hospital, Katni. Before it was recorded, the certification of the Doctor present was given at 7:10 p.m. which certified that the deceased was fit to give her statement. For the sake of brevity, this Court is referring to the answer given by the deceased to question no.5 where she was asked as to how she suffered burns to which the deceased replied that she was cooking food and on account of stove burst, she caught fire. The time of the incident given by the deceased is 10:30 a.m. In question no.7, she was specifically asked whether anyone had burnt her to which she says 'No'. After the statement was recorded there is another certification of the Doctor who certified that the deceased was conscious throughout the recording of the statement. This certification is at 7:30 p.m. The dying declaration was Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRIYANKA recorded by one R.R. Pandey who is the Tehsildar, Katni and the end time is given as 7:25 p.m. It is essential to mention here that the said Tehsildar has been examined as PW-8 to which this Court shall shortly refer. Thereafter, she was shifted to Jabalpur Medical College and Hospital on 20.09.2002 and two days later, a second dying declaration was recorded on 22.09.2002 at 2:31 p.m. in the Burn Ward of the Medical College. There is a certification of the Doctor Pankaj Garde at 2:34 p.m. to the effect that the patient is in a condition to give statement. Once again, for the sake of brevity, this Court refers to directly to the most relevant questions put by the Tehsildar, Jabalpur as to how she suffered burns injuries to which the deceased has answered that she was cutting vegetables when her mother-in-law and elder sister-in- law poured kerosene oil on her and set her on fire. As regards the timings, she said that it was approximate