GUMAN MAL LODHA, J. - (1.) BOTH these appeals, one from Jail, and the other one represented by an Advocate, filed by the accused-appellant Nagpal Singh against his conviction and sentence under S. 302 IPC awarded by the Additional Sessions Judge, Dholpur; have been argued by Shri Sajjan Singh the learned Amicus Curiae, who was appointed as Amicus Curiae, as the lawyers original engaged by the accused, S/shri S. K. Jain and P. K. Sharma did not appear and Shri P. C. Jain learned Advocate appeared on 7. 10. 85 but pleaded no instructions and withdrew his power.
(2.) SHRI Sajjan Singh within two days have prepared the case with the help of the record of this court and provided the real and substantial assistance to this Court in hearing this appeal. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on August 21, 1976 at 9 30 p. m. Smt. Ramshri was taken to Dholpur hospital by Roshan Kanwar Nagpal Singh, Ishwari Jandel Dulla and others and informed Dr. Johari (CW l)'that she sustained burns while cooking the food. The duty Doctor at that hour informed the Medical Jurist Dr. M. L. Maru (PW 9) who reached the hospital and thereafter sent a memo (Ex. P. 8) to the S. H. O. , Kotwali, Dholpur informing that a patient, namely Ramshri aged 40 years admitted in the hospital had expired at 11. 05 p. m. on account of the burn injuries. On this information received at the police station at 12. 30 p. m. on August 22, 1976 a case under S. 174 Cr. P. C. was taken down in the roznamcha; and at 7 a. m. Sheo Dutt Mishra (PW l) Head Constable was deputed for the preparation of the inquest report. When the doctor prepared the post mortem report and sent it to the police, wherein it was opined the case to be one of strangulation, and thus a report (Ex. P. 5) was prepared by Sheo Dutt Sharma on August 28, 1976 by which the case was treated to be one of murder, and it was then that the S. H. O. , on 29th August, 1976 forwarded the case to the police station, Bari under the jurisdiction of which the deceased was living at the time the alleged offence, if any, was committed, though the distance between Dholpur and Bari was not far off yet it took four days to travel the report to the police station Bari, where on September 1, 1976 a case was registered. The accused was arrested on November 30, 1976 and the police also wanted to apprehend the brother of the appellant who has not been apprehended as yet and the police, therefore, signled out the appellant and submitted a challan for the offences under S. 302 and 201 I. P. C. but this was done under Section 299 The case brought but by the investigating officer for submitting the charge-sheet was that the deceased Ramshri who lost her husband more than a score of years, had no issue and one Sukha was cultivating her field on share basis and one Ishwari (PW 2) used to assist her in this task. The deceased had a relation with Mst. Roshan Kanwar, who happened to be related as sister of her husband with two sons namely Nagpal Singh accused and Hari Singh. The financial condition of the sister-in-law and hephews being week, it is alleged that the latter offered to assist the former in cultivation instead of her being cultivated by Chamarans and Ramshri readily agreed as Ishwari did not object to it. This resulted in shifting of Roshan Kanwar and her sons transferring themselves to the place of the deceased and, it is further alleged that the new-comers did not like the visit of Ishwari as according to them he was an eye sore. On this, therefore, the accused told Ishwari that she should not visit Ramshri's place. Naturally, Ishwari protested to Ramshri and latter told her that she would pacify the accused, his brother and mother.
(3.) ON 21st August, 1976 in the evening this Ishwari intended to go for natural call and went to collect tumbler, came across Mst. Roshan Kanwar who too was going to ease herself. When Ishwari was returning from natural call she heard a cry coming from Ramshri's house given by Roshan Kanwar that Ramshri is burning; on hearing it Janak Singh (PW3) Jhandel (PW4), Valdev (PW5), Dulla (PW6) Ishwari (PW 2) and several other villagers assembled there. They found that Ramshri was made to lie on a cot with a bed-sheet. ONly her two hands were visible which had some movements. Nagpal Singh, Hari Singh along with Roshan Kanwar were present there, were reported that she caught fire. It is thereafter that she was removed to the hospital resulting in her succumbing to injuries, subsequent reports, investigation as on and so forth, as indicated earlier. When the accused was charge-sheeted, he was committed to Sessions for trial where he was charged for substantive offence under Section 302 IPC which he denied. The accused denied the charge and claimed to be tried. His reply to the charge was that while cooking food she caught fire, and that he has been falsely implicated at the instance of Ishwari. The prosecution examined 11 witnesses in support of its case. The accused in his explanation denied the correctness of the statements of the prosecution witnesses, who led no oral evidence except that he produced an affidavit of Roshan Kanwar dated 25th April, 1977. The learned Judge thereafter felt the necessity of examining the doctor who had admitted her in the hospital and thereafter summoned Dr. Johari as a court-witness. ;