Ram Krishna Gautam, J. - (1.) This appeal u/s 374(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to be Cr.P.C.) has been filed by Smt. Sangeeta Jain, against State of U.P., against judgment of conviction and sentence therein, passed in S.T. No. 382 of 2016, State of U.P. Vs. Sangeeta Jain, arising out of Case Crime No. 5 of 2016, u/s 307, 504 I.P.C., P.S. Nehtore, District Bijnor, by Court no. 2 of Additional Sessions Judge, Bijnor, whereby sentence of seven years' R.I. and fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default one month's additional imprisonment for offence punishable u/s 307 I.P.C. with one year's R.I. and fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default additional imprisonment of one week, for offence punishable u/s 504 I.P.C., was awarded against convict-appellant Sangeeta Jain, with a direction for concurrent running of sentences and adjustment of previous sentence, if any, on the ground that the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence was against facts and evidence placed on record. Convict-appellant was innocent and there was no evidence on record against her. But the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence, as above, was awarded. Convict-appellant was an issueless lady. She could not conceive, resulting her expulsion from the house of her husband and in-laws. This report was got lodged after a delay of 5-6 days and this delay was never explained, even then the impugned judgment of conviction was passed and sentence, as above, was awarded. Hence this appeal with prayer for setting aside impugned judgment of conviction and sentence made therein, with a further prayer of acquittal of charges.
(2.) From the very perusal of record of trial court, it is apparent that case crime No. 5 of 2016 u/s 307, 504 I.P.C. was got lodged at 21.30 hours of 11.1.2016 at P.S. Nehtore, upon written report of informant-complainant Sandeep Kumar Jain, against his wife Sangeeta Jain with this contention that Sangeeta Jain, with intention to kill her mother-in-law Smt. Rajrani Jain, on 5.1.2016 attempted to commit her murder by strangulating and assault by penetration of some pointed substance over her head and waist. Attempt was made for electrocuting and burning her by hot water. She was often assaulting with abuse to informant and his mother. An attempt to kill informant was previously made. Hence this report (Ext. Ka1), under scribe and signature of informant Sandeep Kumar Jain, was submitted. Chick F.I.R. (Ext. Ka5) was lodged. Investigating Officer, PW7 Nandan Singh Bisht, visited spot on 12.1.2016, took in possession electric immersion rod with wire and stone grinder (Sil ka batta) and blood stained clothes, lying on the spot, by preparation of recovery memo (Ext. Ka4). CCTV footage was taken in custody, spot map of place of occurrence (Ext. Ka9) was prepared and after investigation Charge sheet (Ext. Ka10) was filed against Smt. Sangeeta Jain.
(3.) Injured Rajrani (PW2) was taken at Primary Health Centre, Nehtore, Bijnor, where Dr. Gulshan Babu Katariya (PW5) Medical Officer incharge, P.H.C., Nehtore, examined the injured Rajrani, aged about 62 years, w/o Shreyansh Jain, R/o Mohalla Sabzi Mandi, P.S. Nehtore, Bijnor, wherein she was found to be with following injuries:- 1.Contusion 10 x 2 cm on left side of waist, 1 cm below from inferior angle of scapula. 2.Contusion 7 x 2 cm on right side back of waist, 2 cm below inferior angle of right scapula. 3.Contusion 8 x 2 cm on lower part of L1 vertibra. 4. Lacerated wound 2 x 1 cm x bone deep on right side of parietal region. Kept under observation. 5. Complaint of pain over chest. 6 Contusion 5 x 2 cm on left lower rib. Kept under observation. In his opinion all injuries were simple except injury nos. 4, 5 and 6. They all were of hard blunt object and were of one day old i.e. of about 1.30 P.M. of 5.1.2016 likely to be caused by stone grinder (sil ka batta). Patient was referred for x-ray examination for injuries 4, 5 and 6. Injury no. 4 was over skull and bone deep, which may be dangerous to life. Medico legal report was prepared under his handwriting and signature at the time of her examination. The same is on record, proved and exhibited as Exhibit Ka7. In cross examination this was said to be injuries of simple in nature, but could not be easily self inflicted. No supplementary report was got prepared by this witness and on the basis of that medical report, no injury can be said to be fatal. X-ray report and x-ray plate nos. 295, 296 and 297 reveals no bony fracture. But all injuries, x-rayed, were simple with no likelihood of any fatality. Injury nos. 3 and 4 were said to be dangerous to life because of its circumstances and seat of injuries. Injured was brought for medical examination by her husband Shreyansh Jain. There was no letter of police for medical examination. This was a private medical examination. A suggestive question was put that Rajrani was with no injury and this report was manipulated. This has been answered in negative.;