JudgmentJudgment Harjit Singh Bedi, J. 1. This appeal arises out of the following facts : Jaspal Kaur (deceased), aged 20 years, a resident of village Bangi Deepa falling in the jurisdiction of Police Station, Raman, had been married off by her father Rikhi Singh with accused Mithu Singh about seven months prior to the incident. Mithu Singh had already been married with accused Jasmel Kaur about 16/17 years before that date but as no child had been born from the marriage, Mithu Singh had contracted a second marriage with the deceased. The accused, however, used to pick up frequent quarrels with the deceased, on which she had returned to her parents home. Mithu Singh thereafter visited his in-laws and told his wife that she could return to his home only if she brought some jewellery and cash from her parents. On February 8,1993, Jaspal Kaur accompanied by her cousin, Jit Singh, and her mother, Malkiat Kaur (P.W. 1), returned to her matrimonial home in village Kararwala. The two accused again quarrelled with her and demanded more money from her parents. At about 5.00/6.00 a.m. Jit Singh went out to answer the call of nature and while he was away, Mithu Singh sprinkled kerosene oil on Jaspal Kaur on the exhortation of Jasmel Kaur and then set her on fire. Jit Singh rushed inside and he along with Malkiat Kaur extinguished the flames. Jaspal Kaur was first removed to the Civil Hospital, Rampura (and a Ruqa in this regard was sent by the doctor to Police Station, Rampura) and then to the Daya Nand Medical College and Hospital, Ludhiana for treatment. She was admitted to the said hospital in the afternoon of February 9,1993 and Dr. Sarvpreet Singh Grewal (P.W. 5) sent information with regard to her admission to Police Station, Sarabha Nagar at Ludhiana at 1.25 p.m. SI Darbara Singh (P.W. 3) of Police Station, Rampura in the meanwhile reached Ludhiana and after getting the opinion of Dr. Ashutosh Talwar (P.W. 6) that the injured was fit to make a statement, recorded the same at 3.15 p.m. and on its basis the formal FIR for offences punishable under Section 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code was registered at Police Station, Rampura at 7.30 p.m. on February 10, 1993. Jaspal Kaur died on February 19,1993 and the offence was thereafter converted into one under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Jaspal Kaur died on February 19,1993 and the offence was thereafter converted into one under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The two accused were arrested on February 21, 1993 after they had been produced before SI Darbara Singh (P.W. 3) by Mukhtiar Singh, Ex-Sarpanch of village Kararwala. On the basis of a disclosure statement made by Mithu Singh, a tin can containing kerosene oil was also recovered. On the completion of the investigation, the accused were charged for offences punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code or in the alternative under Sections 498-A and 304-B of the Code and as they pleaded not guilty, were brought to trial. In order to bring home the guilt to the accused, the prosecution examined P.W. 1 Mukhtiar Kaur, the mother of the deceased; P.W. 3 SI Darbara Singh, who had recorded the dying declaration (Exh. PB) and also investigated the case; P.W. 4 Dr. Anil Goyal, who had conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body and had found severe burn injuries thereon; P.W. 5 Dr. Sarvpreet Singh, then posted as the Casualty Medical Officer in Daya Nand Medical College and Hospital, Ludhiana, who had medico-legally examined Jaspal Kaur on her admission to the hospital on February 9, 1993; P.W. 6 Dr. Ashutosh Talwar, who had been working as a Registrar in Surgery Department, Daya Nand Medical College and Hospital, Ludhiana and who stated that he had declared the injured fit to make her statement at about 2.15 p.m. on February 10,1993 and it was thereafter that SI Darbara Singh had recorded the dying declaration. Jit Singh was, however, given up as having been won over. 2. The prosecution case was then put to the accused and their statements recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. They denied the allegations levelled against them. Mithu Singh stated that Jaspal Kaur has suffered the burns accidentally and it was he who had taken her first to the hospital at Rampura and thereafter to Ludhiana and had in fact incurred all the expenses on her treatment. Jasmel Kaur pleaded an alibi and stated that she had not been present in the house when the incident had happened. Mithu Singh accused also led defence evidence by producing Malkiat Singh (D.W. 1) and Rajinder Singh (D.W. 2) to prove the story with regard to the accidental burns. Jasmel Kaur pleaded an alibi and stated that she had not been present in the house when the incident had happened. Mithu Singh accused also led defence evidence by producing Malkiat Singh (D.W. 1) and Rajinder Singh (D.W. 2) to prove the story with regard to the accidental burns. He also appeared as D.W. 3 in support of his case. 3. The Trial Court held that the story, as depicted, clearly did not make out a case of suicide and as the dying declaration had been recorded by SI Darbara Singh (P.W. 3) without undue delay, was a fact clearly in support of the prosecution story and the mere fact that no effort had been made by the said officer to get the dying declaration recorded by a Magistrate was, in that situation, of no significance. It was also observed that from the medical evidence it was clear that the deceased had been in a fit condition to make her statement. The Court, however, held that a case under Section 304-B or 498-A of the Indian Penal Code could not be made out against the accused as the aforesaid sections pertained to ill-treatment or unnatural death of a wife alone and Jaspal Kaur could not attain that status as Jasmel Kaur, Mithu Singhs first wife was still living. The Trial Court accordingly acquitted the two accused for offences under Sections 304-B and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, but convicted and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each and in default thereof to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one year under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. 4. Criminal Appeal No. 109-DB of 1998 has been filed by the accused challenging their conviction, whereas Criminal Revision No. 325 of 1998 has been filed by Rikhi Singh, father of the deceased, praying for compensation from the accused. 5. It has been argued by Mr. T.S. Sangha, the learned Counsel for the accused that it was the admitted case that Jaspal Kaur deceased had been removed to the Civil Hospital, Rampura and thereafter to the Daya Nand Medical College and Hospital, Ludhiana by Mithu Singh accused and as such the very conduct of the accused, in the circumstances, was of great significance. T.S. Sangha, the learned Counsel for the accused that it was the admitted case that Jaspal Kaur deceased had been removed to the Civil Hospital, Rampura and thereafter to the Daya Nand Medical College and Hospital, Ludhiana by Mithu Singh accused and as such the very conduct of the accused, in the circumstances, was of great significance. He has further urged that it was also admitted position that Mithu Singh was 50 years of age, whereas the deceased was 30 years junior to him and that the second marriage had been contracted by Mithu Singh on the advice and consent of his first wife, Jasmel Kaur, as she had not been able to conceive despite having been married for about 16/17 years ago and as Jasmel Kaur belonged to a poor family, there was no occasion for any demand of dowry being made from her parents. It has also been submitted that SI Darbara Singh had not made any attempt to get her statement recorded by a Magistrate, though she had remained alive for ten days after the incident it appears that even on the date when the alleged dying declaration had been made, she had not been fit to make a statement. 6. Mr. S.S. Randhawa, the learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab has, however, supported the judgment of the Trial Court and has urged that there was absolutely no reason to doubt the veracity of the dying declaration in which Jaspal Kaur had named the two accused as having set her on hire as she had not been able to fulfil the demands of dowry and that this dying declaration was supported by the evidence of P.W. 1 Mukhtiar Kaur, her mother. 7. We have considered the arguments advanced by the learned Counsels for the parties and have gone through the evidence very carefully. 8. It is the admitted position that Mithu Singh accused was 30 years older in age to the deceased. He had, however, contracted a second marriage as he had not been able to have a child from his first wife Jasmel Kaur. It is, therefore, obvious that the parents of the deceased Jaspal Kaur had married her to Mithu Singh as he was financially secure. Even Mukhtiar Kaur had admitted that the marriage had been performed for such a consideration. It is, therefore, obvious that the parents of the deceased Jaspal Kaur had married her to Mithu Singh as he was financially secure. Even Mukhtiar Kaur had admitted that the marriage had been performed for such a consideration. We, therefore, find that in this situation, demands for dowry could not have been made from an extremely poor family, which was a fact well known to Mithu Singh. We are also of the opinion that as the second marriage had apparently been contracted with the consent of Jasmel Kaur accused, there was perhaps no occasion for her to make any demand whatsoever from Jaspal Kaur, who was a mere child of 20 years of age. Once it is so held, the very basis of the prosecution story becomes suspect. 9. In view of the above, the conduct of Mithu Singh accused becomes very relevant. It has been admitted by Mukhtiar Kaur (P.W. 1) as also SI Darbara Singh (P.W. 3), Dr. Sarvpreet Singh Grewal (P.W. 5) and Dr. Ashutosh Talwar (P.W. 6) that Mithu Singh had removed Jaspal Kaur first to the hospital at Rampura and thereafter to Ludhiana. It is also the case of accused Mithu Singh that it was he, who had incurred all expenses towards her treatment. This fact has been denied by Mukhtiar Kaur in her evidence when she stated that she had purchased medicines for her daughter at Ludhiana. This statement is obviously not correct as she also admitted that she had only Rs. 500/- with her. when she had come to Jaspal Kaurs house on the day of incident. It can be taken note of that Rs. 500/- could not go a long way in treating Jaspal Kaur for her injuries at Rampura and thereafter at the Daya Nand Medical College and Hospital, Ludhiana. It is, therefore, obvious that it was Mithu Singh who had not only carried Jaspal Kaur to the hospital, but had also spent a good sum of money in order to give her medically best treatment. 10. The veracity of the dying declaration (Exh. PB) must now be examined. The incident had happened on February 9, 1993 and Jaspal Kaurs statement had been recorded on February 10,1993 and she had died on February 19,1993. 10. The veracity of the dying declaration (Exh. PB) must now be examined. The incident had happened on February 9, 1993 and Jaspal Kaurs statement had been recorded on February 10,1993 and she had died on February 19,1993. It had come in the evidence of P.W. 3 SI Darbara Singh that he had made no attempt to secure the presence of a Magistrate in order to record her statement despite the ample time, which was available with him. We are further of the opinion that the medical evidence itself suggests that Jaspal Kaur was not in a fit condition to make her statement to SI Darbara Singh. It has come in the evidence of Dr. Ashutosh Talwar (P.W. 6) that the deceased had approximately 90% burn injuries of second to third degree on her body and that at the time of her admission to the Daya Nand Medical College and Hospital in the afternoon of February 9, 1993, she had been in a semiconscious condition, not at all cooperative and not fully oriented as to time, place and person. He further stated that on February 10,1993 at 10.00 a.m. he had found her to be non-cooperative though conscious, but unfit to make a statement and that she had difficulty in speaking on account of swelling on her face and lips. We, however, observe that this doctor had, at 2.15 p.m. on the same day, declared her fit to make a statement which was recorded at 3.15 p.m. after a delay of an hour. Dr. Ashutosh Talwar further admitted that the statement had not been recorded in his presence and that no certificate had been issued by him certifying her to be in a fit state of mind at that time and that no certificate of fitness other than the one given at 2.15 p.m. had been subsequently given. In this view of the matter, we are of the opinion that recording of the statement (Exh. PB) is itself in doubt. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the prosecution story suffers from serious infirmities. 11. We accordingly allow the appeal and order the acquittal of the accused. The revision is also dismissed.