State Of Chhattisgarh, Through District Magistrate Korba, Chhattisgarh v. 1 - Kewal Das Panika, S/o
Case Details
1 . 2025:CGHC:13525-DB NAFR ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Digitally signed by ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Date: 2025.03.22 17:09:39 +0530 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 37 of 2017 State Of Chhattisgarh, Through District Magistrate Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant versus 1 - Kewal Das Panika, S/o Shri Dafe Das, Aged About 45 Years R/o Dumarmuda, Police Station Darri, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Smt. Maan Kunwar, W/o Shri Kewal Das Panika, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Dumarmuda, Police Station Darri, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Appellant
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Deepak Kumar Singh, P.L. For Respondents No.1 & 2 : Mr. Gajanand Ratre, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr. Shailendra Dubey, Advocate D.B. : Hon'ble Shri Justic e Sanjay S. Agrawal & Hon’ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal Judgment on Board Per Sanjay S. Agrawal, J 21.03.2025 1. This appeal has been preferred by the Appellant/ State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, questioning the legality and propriety of the Judgment dated 20.07.2016 passed by the Additional Judge to the Katghora Court of 2 Additional Sessions Judge, Katghora, Distt.-Korba in Sessions Trial No.13/2012, whereby, the respondents have been acquitted from the commission of the offence punishable under Section 304-B/34 and alternatively under Section 302/34 IPC. 2. Briefly stated, the case of the prosecution is that the marriage of the deceased Uttara Kumari was solemnized with one Narendra Das on 19.04.2010, and after the solemnization of her marriage, the father-in-law and in mother-in-law, the respondents herein, started harassing her mentally as well as physically, as she brought the dowry below their expectations. It is alleged further that on 20.02.2011 at about 8:00 AM to 9:00 AM, the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased have beaten her and after pouring kerosene oil ablazed her, owing to which, she suffered burn injuries to the extent of 80% and was admitted into the hospital at NTPC Darri, where she was examined by Dr. Baburai Soren and her dying declaration was recorded on the same day vide (Ex.P/13) and looking to her critical condition, she was shifted to CIMS hospital, Bilaspur for her better treatment but, during the course of treatment, she died on 24.02.2011. On account of her death, an information was furnished by ward-boy of the said hospital to City Kotwali outpost CIMS on 25.02.2011 vide (Ex.P/10) and after holding the merg inquiry, an FIR (Ex.P/17) was registered against the respondents on 09.08.2011 with regard to the offence punishable under Section 304-B/34 and, vide (Ex.P/6) cloths of the deceased with smell of kerosene oil, a 3 Jerican and matchbox were recovered from the spot in presence of two witnesses, namely, Shatrughan (PW/4) and Jairam (PW/5). Inquest of the dead body was conducted vide Ex.P/2, and was sent for autopsy and according to the post-mortem report (Ex.P/5), the cause of death was found to be cardio respiratory failure as a result of shock due to burn injuries. 3. After completing the usual investigation, the charge-sheet was submitted by the concerned Investigating Officer before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Katghora, in connection with Crime No.142/2011 against the respondents for the offence punishable under Sections 304-B and 302 read with Section 34 of IPC and, the matter was thereafter committed to the Court of Sessions, where the charges have been framed against the respondents under Section 304-B/34 IPC and/ or under Section 302/34 of IPC and, the charges so framed were denied by them and claimed to be tried. 4. 5. In order to bring home the guilt of the respondents, the prosecution has examined as many as 18 witnesses and has exhibited 24 documents, while none was examined by the respondents in their defence. The Trial Court, after considering the evidence led by the prosecution, arrived at a conclusion that since the deceased was not found to be in a fit mental condition, her dying declaration recorded on 20.02.2011 vide (Ex.P/13) cannot be held to be relied upon and by observing further that since none of the prosecution 4 witness have found to be consistent pertaining to the alleged allegation of demand of dowry, therefore, the respondents cannot be held liable for the commission of the alleged offence and, accordingly they have been acquitted and, being aggrieved, the instant appeal has been preferred. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the Appellant/ State submits that the finding of the Trial Court holding that the respondents are not the authors of the alleged crime, is apparently contrary to the materials available on record, inasmuch as, the evidence led by the prosecution, particularly the statement of the deceasd-Uttara Kumari and her parents, have not been scanned in its proper manner and thereby erred in acquitting them, as such. 7. On the other hand, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents have supported the impugned judgment of acquittal as passed by the Trial Court. 8. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the entire record carefully. 9. From perusal of the record, it appears that the marriage of the deceased-Uttara Kumari was solemnized with one Narendra Das on 19.04.2010 and, it was alleged by the prosecution that she was harassed and maltreated by the father-in-law and mother-in-law, as she did not bring the sufficient dowry as per their expectations, owing to which, on the fateful day, i.e. 20.02.2011, she was assaulted by them and thereafter, set her ablazed, by pouring the kerosene oil. It appears further that owing to the alleged incident 5 she was initially admitted into the hospital at NTPC, Darri, where she was treated by Dr. Baburai Soren (PW/7) and looking to her critical condition, she was shifted to CIMS Hospital, Bilaspur where during the course of her treatment, she died on 24.02.2011. 10. It appears further that when the deceased was admitted into the NTPC Hospital at Darri, her dying declaration (Ex.P/13) was recorded on the same day by the Executive Magistrate/ Tahsildar (PW/11). In her dying declaration, it was stated by her that on the said fateful day, her husband had gone to attend the call of nature, while her brother-in-law (Devar) Jitendra and her in-laws were at home. Further of her said statement would show that her father-in-law and mother-in-law have quarreled with her on account of dowry and poured the kerosene oil upon her and the father-in-law has ablazed her while using the matchbox and when she shouted her husband, brother-in-law (Devar) and all have came and took her to the hospital. She stated further that when she was burnt, the father-in-law and mother-in-law alone were there, who have earlier also used to quarrel with her on account of the demand of dowry, while her husband has never quarreled with her. The alleged statement of the prosecutrix was recorded by Executive Magistrate/ Tahsildar (PW/11), who stated that after knowing about the condition of the deceased from the Medical Officer, he recorded the alleged statement (Ex.P/13) as per her statement and, who was found to be mentally fit at the relevant point of time. It, however, appears that when her dying declaration 6 was recorded, no medical certificate was attached with it, showing that she was in a fit mental condition to state, nor any explanation has been offered to his effect as to why it was not obtained before recording her said statement (Ex.P/13). It is to be seen further that when she was admitted into the NTPC Hospital at Darri, she was examined by the Medical Officer, namely, Baburai Soren (PW/7) who conducted her MLC vide (Ex.P/8A) and, a bare perusal of his statement would show that, if the person is burnt to the extent of 80%, he would then be not in a position to state and his capacity to understand the things would come to an end and, would be murmuring senselessly and the same was the condition of the deceasd-Uttara Kumari and that was the reason why he referred her for better treatment. It is to be seen further, at this juncture, the statement of Balram Prasad Sahu (PW/18), who was the Assistant Sub-Inspector and according to him, the deceased was not in a position to state anything and therefore, he informed the Police Station Darri, vide Ex.P/24, that she was burnt while cooking the food in “Chulha” and the said fact was mentioned in the said report as was narrated by her in-laws. 11. What is, therefore, reflected, that she was not in a fit mental condition to state and therefore, her dying declaration (Ex.P/13) was rightly disbelieved by the Trial Court and we, accordingly affirmed the same. 12. Insofar as, the allegation of demand of dowry is concerned, it appears from the evidence of her father, namely, Premdas, 7 (PW/1), particularly Para-6, that his daughter had never informed him, that her in-laws have ever demanded the dowry and stated suo motu that she informed the alleged fact to her mother and the neighborhood. It reveals further from his testimony that they have not lodged any report against the Respondents/ accused regarding the alleged demand of dowry. 13. Sakuntala (PW/2), the mother of the deceased has stated that she received the information from her daughter that her in-laws used to demand of dowry and owing to which she was maltreated by them, as she came with small utensils and would keep her only when she bring some more dowry. Pukhrajbai (PW/3) was the grandmother of the deceased and, it was stated by her that when she met the deceased in the hospital, she informed her that because of demand of dowry, she was burnt by the respondents/ in-laws, and stated further that when she was asked who burnt her, it was then replied by her that the father-in-law has poured the kerosene oil upon her, while mother-in-law has ablazed her while using the matchbox, but, the said version was, however, not found placed in her said dying declaration (Ex.P/13), where she has stated that the father-in-law has burnt her with the matchbox and, not the mother-in-law. That apart, Sukhmat Bai (PW/10), who was the maternal grandmother of the deceased has, however, stated that the deceased was living separately from her in-laws and was living happily with her husband. 14. In view of above, it is, thus, evident that no cogent and reliable 8 evidence has been led by the prosecution, so as to hold that she was assaulted or maltreated by the respondents with regard to demand of dowry. It is to be seen further that although, it was stated by the deceased in her said dying declaration (Ex.P/13) that her in-laws have poured the kerosene oil upon her, but, when she was examined by Dr. Baburai Soren (PW/7) on the date of the alleged incident itself, no smell of kerosene oil was, however, found by him, nor was found to be depicted from the MLC Report (Ex.P/8A) of the deceased. Although, there was the smell of kerosene oil in the cloths of the deceased, when that was recovered from the spot vide (Ex.P/6) in presence of two witnesses namely Shatrunghan (PW/4) and Jairam (PW/5), but both these witnesses have, however, turned hostile without supporting the alleged recovery, nor the same was sent for the chemical examination in order to ascertain the said fact and the Trial Court has, therefore, not committed any illegality in disbelieving the alleged allegation of the prosecution as well, so as to, call for any interference in this appeal. 15. In view of the aforesaid background, the appeal, being devoid of merit is, accordingly, dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay S. Agrawal) Judge (Radhakishan Agrawal) Judge Arpan