Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.493 of 2009 =========================================================== Rajendra Das .... .... Appellant Versus State Of Bihar .... .... Respondent =========================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Singh, Amicus Curiae. For the Respondent : Mr. S.N.Prasad, A.P.P. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 05-04-2012 Heard Mr. Pankaj Kumar Singh, learned Amicus Curiae, for the appellant and Mr. S.N.Prasad, learned A.P.P., for the State. 2. The sole appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment of conviction dated 01.05.2009 and order of sentence dated 02.05.2009 passed in Sessions Trial No.159 of 2004 arising out of Chandan P.S.Case No. 36 of 2003 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, IVth, Banka by which he has been convicted under [STATUTE] and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and a fine of Rs.10,000/-. The trial court has also ordered that in case of failure to deposit the amount of fine the appellant will have to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years in addition to the Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.493 of 2009 dt.05-04-2012 2 sentence awarded for the offence. 3. The prosecution case is based on the fardbeyan of the informant Pariya Devi, wife of the appellant, which was recorded by S.I. S.K.Mandal, Officer-in-Charge of Katoria police station on 10.06.2003 at 9.30 a.m. in Referral Hospital, Katoria. The informant, in her fardbeyan, alleged that she was married to the appellant about a year back, after his first wife deserted him as he frequently used to subject her with cruelty. She has further stated that she was taken to her matrimonial home about eight days back. Her husband, a labourer, was a drunkard and he frequently used to assault her. Her mother-in-law always took her side and protested against the act of her son. She has further alleged that in the preceding night at about 3 a.m. while she was fast asleep, her husband poured kerosene oil from Dhivri all over her body, and set her ablaze. On hue and cry raised by her, the neighbours and her sister-in- law came in rescue and took her to hospital. In the fardbeyan, it has also been stated that her husband also came to the hospital and had gone to bring medicine for her at the time of recording of the fardbeyan. 4. The thumb impression of the informant was taken on her fardbeyan. Her statement was recorded in presence of her brother Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.493 of 2009 dt.05-04-2012 3 Upendra Das and one Md. Anwar Hussain, the Block Development Officer, Katoria. The informant’s brother, Upendra Das, put his L.T.I. and Mr. Anwar Hussain, put his signature on the fardbeyan. 5. Mr. S.K.Mandal, the Officer-in-Charge of Katoria police station, after recording the fardbeyan of the informant, forwarded the same to the Incharge Anandpur outpost as the occurrence had not taken place within the jurisdiction of Katoria police station. Thereafter, one Panchi Lal, Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police posted at Anandpur outpost received the fardbeyan on 10.06.2003 itself. He took up the investigation himself and forwarded the fardbeyan to the Officer-in-Charge, Chandan police station for instituting the FIR. On 11.06.2003 at 4.30 p.m. one Sanjay Kumar, Officer-in-Charge, Chandan police station registered a formal FIR under [STATUTE] and directed that since A.S.I. Panchi Lal had already taken up the investigation he would continue with the investigation of the case. 6. During pendency of the investigation, the victim died, and her postmortem was conducted on 22.06.2003 at 1.30 p.m. in Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Bhagalpur. From the postmortem report, which has been brought on record, it appears that her dead body Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.493 of 2009 dt.05-04-2012 4 was received at 11 a.m. in the hospital on 22.06.2003. The victim had sustained 100% dermo-epidermal burn injury with line of redness involving the whole body. The injury sustained by her was antemortem and was caused by flame of fire. The doctor who conducted the postmortem examination has written in the postmortem report that the time elapsed since her death was between 12 to 36 hours. 7. On conclusion of investigation, the police submitted chargesheet in the case. The learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence and after supplying the police papers in terms of Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the case was committed to the court of Sessions for trial. The trial court framed the charges under [STATUTE] against the sole appellant. The appellant did not plead guilty to the charges and claimed to be tried. 8. In course of trial, four witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution. Out of the four witnesses, P.W.1 Geniya Devi and P.W.3 Urmila Devi were declared hostile by the prosecution. P.W.4 Satish Chandra Singh, a formal witness is an Advocate’s Clerk and has proved the postmortem report which has been marked as Ext-4. In cross- examination he admits that neither the postmortem report was prepared Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.493 of 2009 dt.05-04-2012 5 in his presence nor he had any personal knowledge regarding the postmortem examination conducted on the dead body of the deceased. 9. The only other witness examined on behalf of the prosecution in course of trial is P.W.2 Sanjay Kumar. He is a police officer who was entrusted with the investigation at a later stage. In his examination-in-chief he has stated that he took up the investigation of the case on 15.09.2003 from one Dilip Kumar Singh. He futher states that he received the postmortem report and pursuant to direction of the Sub Divisional Police Officer and the Superintendent of Police submitted chargesheet in the case.

Applicable IPC Section: 324

Statute Text:
Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code. Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means. Whoever, except in the case provided for by section 334, voluntarily causes hurt by means of any instrument for shooting, stabbing or cutting, or any instrument which, used as a weapon of offence, is likely to cause death, or by means of fire or any heated substance, or by means of any poison or any corrosive substance, or by means of any explosive substance or by means of any substance which it is deleterious to the human body to inhale, to swallow, or to receive into the blood, or by means of any animal, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.