JUDGMENT 1. This State-appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 5.3.1983 passed in Sessions Trial No. 22/83, by Third Addl. Judge to the Sessions Judge, Gwalior, thereby acquitting the respondent/ accused-persons of charge under Section 302 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. 2. The facts unfolding the prosecution story are as under - Deceased Madhu Sharma was married to respondent/accused Amitabh. Respondent accused Amresh Kumar is younger brother of Amitabh and respondent-accused Vandana is sister-in-law of the deceased. Vandana was. married some twelve years before the incident but she sought divorce from her husband and was residing with his father, another acquitted co-accused Devi Prasad. 3. The in-laws of the deceased including the respondents were not happy with the deceased because their demand for dowry was not met by her father. She was then subjected to harassment which amounted to cruelty and beating by her husband respondent-accused Amitabh. When brother of the deceased came to bring her she was not even allowed to visit her parents. An additional demand of Rs. 5000/- and arrangement of job for accused Amitabh was also raised on behalf of the respondents. However, when Siyaram Sharma (PW3) assured that he will pay this amount in installments and will also arrange for some job for respondent Amitabh then alone the deceased was allowed to visit her parents. 4. In June 1982, when deceased visited her parents she narrated the painful story of torture meted out to her by her husband and in-laws. She requested that respondents required payment of about Rs. 5000/- for arranging the marriage of another sister-in-law Archana. On 29.6.1982, father of deceased presented some articles of about Rs. 2,000/- in the marriage of Archana. The mother of the deceased at this time did not allow her to go to her in-laws for about two months. During this period, her husband Amitabh kicked her on stomach for not offering money or making any arrangement of his job. He further threatened her that if she will not accompany him he will get her brothers murdered. 5. In the month of Shravan, when deceased again visited her parents accompanied by accused Amitabh, he was presented Rs. 51/- at the time of departure, but he threw it out saying that he is son of a Principal and should have been presented at least Rs. 5. In the month of Shravan, when deceased again visited her parents accompanied by accused Amitabh, he was presented Rs. 51/- at the time of departure, but he threw it out saying that he is son of a Principal and should have been presented at least Rs. 351/-, thereupon, the parents of the deceased had to oblige him by presenting a wrist watch of Rs. 390/-. On 30.8.1982 at the time of saying last good bye to her parents, the deceased expressed fear that now she will not survive to show her face again. 6. On 7.9.1982, the in-laws of the deceased leveled false allegation of stealing jewellery against her and she was mercilessly beaten by her husband accused Amitabh. She was again beaten by her husband in next morning. It is alleged that accused Amitabh assaulted her with a Jhadu and gave her shock touching the electric current. On the same day, at about 9.15 A.M. when deceased was in her prayer room sitting in a meditating posture, respondents accompanied with other acquitted co-accused Devi Prasad and Gomti Bai entered the place. Respondent Vandana suddenly closed her eyes from behind and respondent Amresh Kumar poured kerosene oil and set fire to her. Her raising alarm attracted from neighbourhood Gajraj Singh and others who reached there and extinguished fire. Meanwhile, Shashikant alias Munna (PW7) and Mishrilal (PW9) also arrived. The deceased was taken in a taxi by respondent Amitabh and his maternal uncle Ayodhya Prasad to Kamlaraja hospital Gwalior. While she was on the way to the hospital, Ayodhya Prasad requested her to save her in-laws and not to disclose their names. 7. Dr. Brijesh Kumar Saxena (PW1) gave first aid treatment to the deceased and is also alleged to have recorded her dying declaration (Ex.D/1). On the same day, at about 2.15 pm, Executive Magistrate S.C. Shukla (PW2) recorded her another dying declaration (Ex.P/2). Her condition deteriorated and she expired at about 4 P.M. on the same day. 8. Sub Inspector (PW11) Prahlad Parashar recorded panchanama of the dead-body of the deceased (Ex.P/3). A Panel of the doctors consisting of Dr. V.K. Diwan and Dr. Daryab Singh (PW8) conducted the post-mortem (Ex.P/7) of the dead body after receiving requisition (Ex.P/6) from the Police authorities. Her condition deteriorated and she expired at about 4 P.M. on the same day. 8. Sub Inspector (PW11) Prahlad Parashar recorded panchanama of the dead-body of the deceased (Ex.P/3). A Panel of the doctors consisting of Dr. V.K. Diwan and Dr. Daryab Singh (PW8) conducted the post-mortem (Ex.P/7) of the dead body after receiving requisition (Ex.P/6) from the Police authorities. In the opinion of the doctors who conducted post mortem of the deceased the total burns were about 75% to 80% on the dead body and the same were found fatal in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. The cause of death was found due to cardio respiratory failure as a combined effect of burn and intra abdominal haemorrhage. 9. Town Inspector S.S. Sharma (PW10) visited the house of the respondents on the day of incident and prepared the spot panchanama (Ex.P/11) in the presence of the witnesses. It was noticed that the prayer room where the deceased was sitting and set fire, was totally washed out in order to eliminate the evidence of the incident. After preliminary investigation, the Town Inspector registered the FIR (Ex.P/9), U/s 302 read with Section 34 and 201 of IPC. 10. The defence of the respondents accused persons is of complete denial with a plea of alibi. However, no defence evidence was led in support of alibi. Although, no appeal has been preferred against the other acquitted co-accused Devi Prasad and Gomtibai who were father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased, but in examination U/s 313 Cr.P.C, accused Gomtibai had stated that at about 9 A.M. when deceased was worshiping, she scolded her as to how long she will continue to pray. This outraged the deceased and she committed suicide by pouring kerosene oil. 11. The learned trial Court after appreciating the evidence on record, came to the conclusion that the cruelty meted out to the deceased was well established. However, in view of the earlier dying declaration recorded by Dr. Saxena in which she had not held any of the respondents accused-persons responsible for her death and had stated that she committed suicide by pouring kerosene on herself due to ill-treatment and torture by her husband, disbelieved the subsequent dying declaration, recorded by the Executive Magistrate and also the ocular evidence brought out on record in respect of her death and thereby awarded benefit of doubt to all the accused persons. 12. 12. The learned panel lawyer representing the State has taken us through the evidence on record and the judgment of the trial Court. The learned panel lawyer strenuously urged that in view of the post-mortem report of the deceased it is well established that her death was not suicidal, but homicidal. 13. We have carefully perused the post mortem report and the statement of Dr. Daryab Singh (PW8) who has nowhere stated that the death of the deceased is homicidal or suicidal. However, he found that the heamtoma on the side of ovary tube was the result of bleeding and it might have been caused some 8-10 days before her death. It means that this fatal injury was not caused on the day of incident. Kelashibai (PW6), mother of the deceased though stated that the husband of deceased had kicked her on the stomach when she was with them, however, there is no evidence that her husband had assaulted her some 8-10 days before the present incident. There is no other evidence to connect the injury of stomach with beating of accused Amitabh. Although, the doctor has opined the cause of death due to cardio respiratory failure as a result of combined effect of burn and intra abdominal haemorrhage, but there is no evidence as to whether the death was homicidal. 14. It can be noticed that for determining the nature of death other circumstances leading to death have to be looked into. For example in the present case, as clear from the post-mortem report and from the panchanama of the dead body, kerosene smell was coming from the hairs over the skull. The burn was found on all over the face, upper part of the chest right and left shoulder, upper part of the abdoman and right thigh indicate that kerosene fell on the frontal side of the body when the deceased was in a sitting posture. 15. However, in case of self burning, if the kerosene is poured by the deceased herself it wound spread on the back side. There is yet another aspect of the matter wherein it can be said that the deceased was in a sitting posture and if intended to sprinkle the kerosene from a bottle in order to immolate herself, the kerosene will naturally fall on frontal side and in that case possibility of committing suicide can not be ruled out. 16. There is yet another aspect of the matter wherein it can be said that the deceased was in a sitting posture and if intended to sprinkle the kerosene from a bottle in order to immolate herself, the kerosene will naturally fall on frontal side and in that case possibility of committing suicide can not be ruled out. 16. Leanred counsel representing the State has assailed the findings of the trial Court mainly on the ground that the first dying declaration recorded by Dr. Brijesh Saxena (PW1) should not have been believed mainly on the ground that the signature of deceased on this dying declaration seems to be forged one as she was not in a position to sign because both of her hands were burnt. It is alleged that Dr. Saxena had recorded dying declaration about 10.10 A.M. to 10.50 A.M. By that time, he had given no medicines to her, but after recording dying declaration, she was administered sedatives. The prosecution has also declared this witness hostile and was given a chance to cross-examine. 17. Dr. Saxena has admitted that respondent accused Vandana, sister-in-law of the deceased was present in the hospital. She was handed over jewellery of the deceased. He recorded her dying declaration in presence of Dr. Tomer, Dr. S.R. Sharma and nurse Rajkumari. However, none of these witnesses were examined by the prosecution. The presence of respondent-accused Vandana goes to indicate that the deceased could not have spoken against her at the time when her parents had not arrived. 18. Dr. Brijesh Kumar Saxena had further admitted in his cross-examination that the subsequent dying declaration recorded by the Executive Magistrate was also endorsed as Ex.P/1 by him. Although, Dr. Saxena states that he informed the Executive Magistrate about recording of earlier dying declaration by him, but the Executive Magistrate has not mentioned this fact on the subsequent dying declaration. 19. The learned senior counsel representing accused respondents has advanced an argument that when first dying declaration was recorded by Dr. Saxena the condition of the deceased was not so serious so as to prevent her from making her signature, however, subsequently, her condition became precarious and as Dr. Saxena has put it, she could not sign because she was in a semi unconscious state. Dr. Saxena the condition of the deceased was not so serious so as to prevent her from making her signature, however, subsequently, her condition became precarious and as Dr. Saxena has put it, she could not sign because she was in a semi unconscious state. Dr. Saxena further could not assign any reason that when the deceased was not in a fit state of condition why he certified on the subsequent dying declaration that she is in a fit state of condition to give a dying declaration. 20. It has been argued for the respondents that as per the statement of Dr. Brijesh Kumar Saxena the sedative was administered to the deceased right from 11 A.M. Dr. Saxena has further admitted that the morphia intravenous was given at about 11-50. The patient had to remain under its influence for about 3-6 hours. In the circumstances, subsequent dying declaration recorded as Ex.P/2 at about 2.15 p.m. also could not be believed because the deceased was under influence of sedatives administered to her. 21. We are of the opinion that the evidence of Dr. Saxena is not worthy of credit. The influence of sedative must not have ended within three hours of its administration, when her subsequent dying declaration was recorded by Dy. Collector S.C. Shukla (PW2). The recording of subsequent dying declaration is further disputed on behalf of respondents-accused persons on the ground that before this dying declaration started the parents of deceased accompanied with other witnesses had already arrived in the hospital and the deceased was compelled to change her version under their influence. It is further contended that there is evidence to show that the deceased had developed a particular feeling of hatred against her sister-in-law Vandana and this is why Vandana was named alongwith other co accused Amresh in her subsequent dying declaration. 22. To a query made by the Court, Dy. Collector S.C. Shulka (PW2) had to admit that after recording the dying declaration of the deceased, Dr. Saxena informed that in the morning deceased told him that she had committed suicide. In the circumstances, it is expected that the dying declaration recorded by Dr. Saxena is genuine and cannot be dis-believed. 23. To a query made by the Court, Dy. Collector S.C. Shulka (PW2) had to admit that after recording the dying declaration of the deceased, Dr. Saxena informed that in the morning deceased told him that she had committed suicide. In the circumstances, it is expected that the dying declaration recorded by Dr. Saxena is genuine and cannot be dis-believed. 23. We are of the considered opinion that before expressing any final opinion as to the truth or otherwise of the first or second dying declaration, it will be necessary to appreciate the evidence of oral dying declaration as made by the deceased to her parents and other witnesses, who accompanied them. 24. No doubt, the dying declaration Ex.D/1 recorded by Dr. Saxena at 10.10 A.M. was the first dying declaration. In this dying declaration, the deceased had narrated that a day before the incident, her father, mother, brother and sister-in-laws leveled false charge of theft against her and she was also scolded. On the day of incident, she was assaulted by her husband with a Jhadu. At about 8.30 A.M. when she was praying her mother and sister-in-laws shouted on her saying that she always gets herself busy in a prayer and when she will look to her routine work. If she will not get up, "Gita" will be thrown on her. This scolding was the height of her tolerance and she committed suicide by saying that don't throw "Gita" on her instead she will ablaze herself for ever. 25. Ram Prakash Sharma (PW6) is brother-in-law of the deceased. He came to know about the incident at about 9.30 A.M. He at once rushed on the spot and found deceased lying in a taxi. Accused Amitabh and his maternal uncle Ayodhya Prasad were also present. He could not enquire any thing from them because the taxi soon headed towards the hospital. He found that father, mother, brother and sister-in-laws of the deceased were washing the kitchen and an adjoining room to it. He straightway came to his house and took Kelashibai, mother of the deceased alongwith his wife to the hospital. When they reached there, they found deceased surrounded by all the accused persons. However, looking to the mother of the deceased, they left her alone. The deceased told them that accused Vandana closed her eyes and accused Amresh after pouring kerosene set fire to her. When they reached there, they found deceased surrounded by all the accused persons. However, looking to the mother of the deceased, they left her alone. The deceased told them that accused Vandana closed her eyes and accused Amresh after pouring kerosene set fire to her. Soon after this disclosure at about 11 A.M., another witness Mahesh (PW4) also joined them and the deceased further repeated the same story to him. However, Mahesh in cross-examination has changed his version by saying that the deceased told him that her husband had beaten her and Vandana set fire to her. 26. What was narrated by the deceased to her mother Kelashibai (PW5) was that in the preceding night all the accused persons started beating her and in the morning all of them set fire to her. She further said that accused Vandana closed her eyes with a bandage and accused Amresh set fire to her. Witness Mahesh though not related to the deceased, but she was treated like the sister by him. From the evidence of these related witnesses to the deceased there are divergent versions in their statements as to how the deceased met her death. There are major contradictions on the point as to who set fire. 27. The subsequent dying declaration (Ex.P/2) was recorded by Dy. Collector Shukla a about 2.50 pm wherein deceased had stated that accused Vandana closed her eyes and Amresh set fire to her. In this dying declaration, the deceased has further stated that she was being harassed for the last ten months and her sister-in-law Vandana had major role to play as she does not want her presence in the house of her in-laws. According to her, the previous marpeet with her was not so serious. She could not say as to actually who set her fire because her eyes were closed and she could not see the person behind her. If this subsequent dying declaration is believed then Amresh has to be awarded benefit of doubt. According to this dying declaration, the deceased raised alarm soon after she was set to fire, which attracted Munna and Padam Saheb. Gajraj Singh is another person who helped her father-in-law in extinguishing the fire. However, none of these except Munna were examined by the prosecution. 28. According to this dying declaration, the deceased raised alarm soon after she was set to fire, which attracted Munna and Padam Saheb. Gajraj Singh is another person who helped her father-in-law in extinguishing the fire. However, none of these except Munna were examined by the prosecution. 28. Shashikant alias Munna (PW7) has deposed that after hearing shouts from the house of father-in-law of the deceased, he reached on the spot and found deceased in a burning condition and lying in the court-yard. He asked her as to how she got burnt, she only stated that she herself had set fire in order to commit suicide. The witness has been declared hostile by the prosecution. He has admitted that he is nephew of Ayodhya Prasad, maternal uncle of deceased's husband. It is but natural that this witness will not disclose the truth and he was rightly declared hostile by the prosecution. 29. Learned counsel representing the State has laid stress on the subsequent dying declaration (Ex.P/2) recorded by the Executive Magistrate Shukla and cited the decisions of the Apex Court in case of Vajrala Paripurnachari Vs. State of A.P., reported in (1998) 6 SCC 463 , Charipalli Shankarao Vs. Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, reported in AIR 1995 SC 777 , Ganpat Mahadeo Mane Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in AIR 1993 SC 1180 and a Division Bench decision of this Court in case of Imran Khan Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in 1994 MPLJ 862 and also in case of Bhagatram and others Vs. State of M.P. reported in 1990 JLJ 329 holding that conviction can be made on a truthful dying declaration. 30. Learned counsel for the State had contended that the deceased was under the influence of her in-laws prayed for mercy at the time of first dying declaration recorded by Dr. Saxena and therefore, she did not name any of the accused persons and took the entire blame on herself. On the others hand, she could gather strength to narrate real-incident in her subsequent dying declaration made to the Executive Magistrate, which is not suffering from any infirmity. Such a statement cannot be vitiated merely because it is not recorded in a proper form or because the witnesses do not state exact words of the deceased in a direct form. 31. Such a statement cannot be vitiated merely because it is not recorded in a proper form or because the witnesses do not state exact words of the deceased in a direct form. 31. Learned senior counsel Shri J.P. Gupta appearing for the respondents accused-persons relied upon another decision of the Apex Court in case of Deorao Vs. State of Maharashtra, reported in 1967 CAR 280, wherein it has been observed - When feelings run high and there was personal cause for enmity, there is a tendency to drag in an innocent person against whom a witness has a grudge along with the guilty, but foundation must be laid for such criticism and a mere fact of relationship far from being a foundation is often a sure guarantee of truth. This Court however observed that no general rule was sought to be laid down by those observations and that each case had to be judged on its own merits. 32. Learned senior counsel for the respondents had assigned following reasons to discredit the subsequent dying declaration, recorded by the Executive Magistrate - (i) the deceased turned her earlier version of committing suicide as recorded in her earlier dying declaration by Dr. Saxena, under the influence of witnesses of her parental side, (ii) Admittedly, the deceased was administered morphia and the influence of this sedative was not altogether removed before recording her subsequent dying declaration, (iii) it is further clear from the evidence brought on record that the deceased had particularly added her sister-in-law respondent-accused Vandana and was further anguished with other co-accused persons on account of her continuous harassment at their hands, (iv). There is no consistency between the witnesses recorded on the point of oral dying declaration and there are major contradictions on the point as to which of accused or accused persons were actually involved in setting the deceased to fire. 33. In the case of Darshan Devi Vs. State of Punjab reported in 1996 SCC (Cr.) 38. The Apex Court sounded a warning in respect of oral dying declaration and observed that - Even though an oral dying declaration can form basis of conviction in a given case, but such a dying declaration has to be trustworthy and free from every blemish and inspire confidence. The reproduction of the exact words of the oral declaration in such cases is very important. The reproduction of the exact words of the oral declaration in such cases is very important. The difference in the exact words of the declaration in the present case detract materially from the value of the oral dying declaration. Where it is found that the deceased was not in a fit condition the version of the witness that he heard deceased making a statement cannot be used in support of the oral dying declaration allegedly made by the deceased soon after the incident. 34. From the evidence discussed above, we are of the considered opinion that where two views are possible in respect of earlier and subsequent dying declaration made by the deceased, one if seems to be more reliable infavour of the accused persons had to be adopted by the Court when the possibility of committing suicide by deceased owing to continuous torture or harassment by her in-laws cannot be ruled out, the story of murder as advanced by the prosecution is not proved beyond doubt. 35. There is yet another angle from which the conduct of the prosecution can be examined. Co-accused Gomtibai, mother-in-law of the deceased in her statement recorded U/s 313 Cr.P.C. has not only admitted her presence on the spot but seems to have taken entire blame on herself by saying that she had scolded the deceased and soon after the deceased committed suicide by setting fire to herself. Another co-accused Devi Prasad, father-in-law of the deceased had also stated that he alongwith Gajraj Singh reached on the spot and extinguished the fire. These two accused-persons further could have been charged U/s 201 of IPC for cleaning the place of occurrence and thereby removing evidence if any. But no appeal against their acquittal has been presented on behalf of the State. Similarly, no attempt was made to file the charge-sheet against accused persons U/s 306 of IPC; otherwise the accused-persons in alternate might have been held guilty of offence U/s 306 of IPC. 36. There is ample evidence on record suggesting that the deceased was continuously subjected to cruelty by her-in-laws with the result she was compelled to commit suicide within a year of her marriage. 36. There is ample evidence on record suggesting that the deceased was continuously subjected to cruelty by her-in-laws with the result she was compelled to commit suicide within a year of her marriage. Since, there is no charge U/s 306 of IPC against the accused-persons as indicated hereinabove, this Court has no power in a state appeal against acquittal to convert the charge of Section 302 of IPC into Section 306 of IPC for the purpose of conviction. The Apex Court in S. Sreenu Vs. State of A.P., reported in AIR 1997 SC 3233 has taken a view that where the accused was acquitted of the charge U/s 302 of IPC which was the only charge framed against him, the High Court cannot convict him of offence U/s 306 of IPC. It is true that Section 222 of Cr.P.C. entitles the Court to convict a person of an offence, which is minor in comparison for which he is tried, but Section 306 of IPC cannot be said to be the minor offence' in relation to an offence U/s 302 of IPC, within the meaning of Section 222 of Cr.P.C. 37. In order to prove an offence U/s 302 read with Section 34 of IPC, a heavy burden lay on the prosecution to prove that all the accused persons have premeditated to cause death of the deceased with intention to kill her. However, in facts and circumstances coupled with complete scenario of the incident even the presence of the respondents accused persons at the time of occurrence at the spot, is not proved beyond doubt. 38. In our considered opinion there is no clear finding of the doctor, who performed post-mortem of the deceased that the death was homicidal. The prosecution should have referred the case for opinion of medico-legal expert at Bhopal. In the circumstances, it is further not established that the death was homicidal. Looking to the contradictions of vital importance in the statements of the witnesses of parental side of the deceased and also in the subsequent dying declaration recorded by the Executive Magistrate, nothing definite can be said as to which of the accused or accused-persons are involved in pouring the kerosene and setting fire to the deceased. Looking to the contradictions of vital importance in the statements of the witnesses of parental side of the deceased and also in the subsequent dying declaration recorded by the Executive Magistrate, nothing definite can be said as to which of the accused or accused-persons are involved in pouring the kerosene and setting fire to the deceased. Further when there are circumstances indicating that it may be a case of suicide, the offence U/s 302/34 of IPC cannot be said to have been established beyond doubt against the respondents accused-persons. 39. It has been argued on behalf of the appellant State that primarily the Court has given much weight to minor discrepancies while acquitting the accused persons. In the circumstances, finding of the lower Court cannot be sustained. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Sonelal Tiwari Vs. State of M.P. reported in 1998 (I) MPLJ 165. 40. We are not in agreement with the above proposition so far as the instant-case is concerned because the evidence which we have pointed out hereinabove clearly goes to indicate that the reasons given by the trial Court are cogent and convincing. In the circumstances, we hold that the finding of the trial Court is neither perverse nor against the record. It is further to be noticed that in the present case, the only evidence available against the respondents accused-persons is the dying declaration of the deceased. In view of the major contradictions between the witnesses, the prosecution evidence as it stands is not reliable and cannot be acted upon for the purpose of conviction U/s 302/34 of IPC. 41. Before we conclude, we feel it our duty to point out the anxiety expressed by the learned trial Judge who raised his hands in despair while acquitting the accused persons and expressed the view that there is no legal provision to punish them in such a henious crime of atrocities against a woman. No doubt, the law as engrafted U/s 498A and 304B of IPC was not in existence at the time of the present incident, but the State through prosecution is equally liable to be condemned for it's ineffective and lethargic attitude in conducting investigation and prosecution against the wrong-doers. No doubt, the law as engrafted U/s 498A and 304B of IPC was not in existence at the time of the present incident, but the State through prosecution is equally liable to be condemned for it's ineffective and lethargic attitude in conducting investigation and prosecution against the wrong-doers. The Medico-Legal Expert at Bhopal was not consulted in such a serious matter even when the prosecution was in possession of two different types of dying declarations. The witnesses of neighbourhood, who first reached on the spot were not examined and lastly, no attempt was made to incorporate Section 306 of IPC at the time of filing of charge-sheet. 42. We are further of the considered opinion that the rising number of cases in respect of atrocities against women, even after the introduction of punishment as provided U/s 498A and 304B of IPC, indicates that mere change of law is not sufficient to prevent this social evil. Laws do not keep their promises because their implementation is entrusted to wholly inefficient and lithargic agencies, including the Police and bureaucracy. Something more is required to be done not only in this direction but in order to check rising culture of violence in our society. 43. To adapt the words of Malcolm Muggeridge : Never was any generation of men intent upon the pursuit of well-being more advantageously placed to attain it, who yet, with seeming deliberation took the opposite course-towards chaos instead of order, towards breakdown instead of stability, towards death, destruction and darkness instead of life creativity and light. 44. "The current decade has ceased to belong to the category of the lost decades in point of economics, but not in point of national leadership and social cohesion" argues eminent jurist Nani A. Palkhivala in his book "We, the Nation, The Lost Decades" and remarked "Never before in our republics history has violence marked our national life on a scale so widespread as at present. We have enough religion to hate one another but not enough to love one another". Not only the crime against women but in all around our life we are in the midst of crimes. Unfortunately, the general masses breed a feeling that the Courts are all powerful and can very well punish the wrong-doers. We have enough religion to hate one another but not enough to love one another". Not only the crime against women but in all around our life we are in the midst of crimes. Unfortunately, the general masses breed a feeling that the Courts are all powerful and can very well punish the wrong-doers. They have in their minds a feeling of justice rendered by "judgment seat of Vikramaditya" and "Pulling Chain of Emperor Jahangir" Few realise that in a democracy where the parties are left free to fight with bundle of lies and the State agencies having responsibility to contribute towards aiding administration of justice turn hostile, a situation is created where the Court cannot be expected to separate grain from the chaff. 45. The ultimate responsibility to vindicate the truth of course, lies legally with the Courts, but in a democratic adminstration of justice, the real responsibility rests with the society as a whole. If the persons residing in the neighbourhood of the parties are not willing to come forward to support the cause of justice or if there is no conducive atmosphere for security of the witnesses, who want to stand by a person having real cause of action and if the State agencies like police and administration are not prompt and true to their duties in such cases, the real cause is likely to be frustrated in the Court of law. 46. We take this opportunity to remind of our past culture for its strong feeling for fighting the cause of true justice. A practice is still prevelent in many of the aboriginal tribes whenever a crime is committed it is considered to be a case of concern to the entire community of the village. These people before going to depose in the Court of law in respect of a crime, decide first amongst themselves whether to support an accused or the State and after taking such a decision they unhesitatingly speak against their own man. Social bycot of criminals was one of the most effective instrument as a corrective measure, prevalent in medieval period of this country. 47. Social bycot of criminals was one of the most effective instrument as a corrective measure, prevalent in medieval period of this country. 47. We call upon all the government agencies and non-governmental institutions, entrusted to render services to the masses to come forward with the schemes implementing revival of our great past in exploring not only peaceful and conducive atmosphere for survival of all the sections of the society but also to create such customs and practices where persons fighting for the cause of truth easily get the necessary relief and full support in getting justice at the local level itself. 48. For the reasons assigned here-in-above we are of the considered opinion that mere condemnation of law and law courts is not the solution to check the alarming rise of violence, atrocities on the weaker sections, law and order situation and effectively dealing with crimes and criminals. No doubt on the civil side of the litigation the worldwide acceptance of the Alternative, Disputes Resolution System (A.D.R.) which includes arbitration, conciliation and mediation may be helpful to emelliorate the position but in matters of criminal jurisprudence a joint cruised from the bottom of the society is needed, which is possible only by "Hindering the Hinderances" that lay in our path to fight out the culprits. How it is to be done in changing scenario of modern times is a matter to be considered by Governmental Agencies/non-governmental different institutions engaged in the cause of public service of castes and communities at all levels. A copy of this judgment therefore, be sent to the Chief Secretary of the State and Centre for circulation among the concerned Departments/agencies and institutions which can serve the common cause regarding the criminal justice. 49. With the observations made here-in-above, this State appeal is dismissed accordingly. Appeal dismissed