Arijit Pasayat, J. - (1.) Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur, directing acquittal of the respondent who faced trial alongwith two others namely, Smt. Keshar Kanwar and Tara Devi. They faced trial for alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 302, 498A, 201, 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the 'IPC'). The trial Court acquitted the accused Keshar Kanwar from the charges relatable to Section 498A, 302/34, 201/34 and 120B IPC. The accused Tara Devi was acquitted from the charges under Section 498A and 120B. Respondent Parmendra Singh was acquitted from the charges under Sections 120B and 201 read with Section 34 IPC but he was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and three years RI for the offences punishable under Section 302 and 498A IPC respectively.
(2.) Prosecution version as unfolded during trial is as follows: On 1st February, 1992 Dr. Khushiram Tewani (PW-30) was working at the post of Medical Officer, Incharge at Primary Health Centre, Bagaur. In the afternoon on that day S.H.O., Bagaur brought Lalita, wife of respondent in burnt and unconscious condition for medical treatment. Lalita was admitted in the Primary Health Centre by him and initial treatment was given to her. In this regard, a slip Ex.P-58 was prepared. Lalita's body was received with more than 80% burn injuries and considering her condition he could not give her medical treatment due to lack of resources. Therefore, within half an hour she was referred to District Hospital, Bhilwara. According to Ex.P-58 at 3.05 in the afternoon Lalita was brought before him. There were several statements of the deceased which were treated as dying declarations. The trial Court found the accused guilty, convicted and sentenced as noted above basing on the dying declarations. In appeal, the High Court directed acquittal primarily on the ground that the dying declarations were not reliable. The Police Regulation relating to recording of dying declaration was violated and the deceased was not in a position to give her statement. It was noted that there was great variation between the dying declarations. There were four dying declarations in fact.
(3.) Learned Counsel for the appellant-State submitted that in all the dying declarations name of the husband was mentioned and in all the four dying declarations the role played by the mother was also described except one where the father-in-law was named. Learned Counsel for the respondent supported the judgment of the High Court.;