news details |
|
|
| Husband acquitted from charges of killing wife | | | Jammu, Feb 24
2nd Additional Sessions Judge Jammu Mr. AK Koul today acquitted Ashok Kumar husband of the deceased, Mohinder Kumar brother of accused No1 and Roshan Lal from the charges leveled against them.
According to the case the police received information on August 4, 2004 that Anita Devi w/o Ashok Kumar is battling for her life in GMC Jammu with burn injuries all over her body. ASI Lal Chand rushed to hospital and recorded statement of the injured. In her statement she narrated that she was married to accused No 1, 10 years ago and out of wedlock two daughters were born and her husband was intending to go for second marriage and on August 4, 2004 at 7:30 in the morning pulled her out of the room and dragged her in the compound. Other accused were standing there, her husband doused her with kerosene oil and her mother-in-law Vaishno Devi put her on fire and she sustained burn injuries. On the basis of this statement, the police registered a case u/s 307, 147/34 RPC.
In the 3 pages judgment Mr.Koul after hearing Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the state and Advocate SC Subash appearing for the accused persons observed that the evidence adduced by the prosecution does not inspire confidence and it would as such be hazardous to form an opinion of guilt on these evidences. The only evidence left with the court is the dying declaration of the deceased. The prosecution case is that deceased gave a statement on August 4, 2004 to the IO in the hospital and it is this statement of the her which being termed as dying declaration and on which much reliance is being placed by the prosecution. Before recording the dying declaration the police officer sought an opinion from the doctor about the fitness of the deceased to give a statement, the doctor said that she is clinically fit for the statement. After having obtained the certificate of fitness, the police officer recorded the statement of deceased. In the present case a dying declaration can form the basis for conviction which court took for consideration from different circumstances. The same cannot be tested by cross-examination. A dying declaration being made under the solemn sense of impending death, the deceased is usually not likely to commit any mistake and therefore, same is given great weight. But at the same time a court has a duty to scrutinize the same because the accused has no right to cross-examination. It is not a statement on oath and its veracity cannot be tested on cross examination. The IO ASI who has recorded the dying declaration in his statement deposed that as he reached the hospital emergency ward where the deceased was admitted, he found the parents of the deceased present there conversing with her. The deceased was injured and she was battling for life and what had she to discuss with her parents, IO does not know. He said that the parents of the deceased were tutoring her for the statements. After hearing both the sides’ court acquitted the three accused and ordered that rest of the accused against whom proceedings u/s 512 CrPC stand initiated, shall be put to trial, as and when they appear or arrested
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
