Kamla Bai & Ors. vs The State Of M.P on 8 February, 2011
On the contrary, in the earlier part of it, it
was stated that her mother-in-law, sister-in-law and sister-in-law's son
set fire to her. The evidence of dying declaration, therefore, against
mother-in-law i.e. appellant Kamla Bai appears consistent. However, it
appears inconsistent and doubtful about the act attributed to appellant
Samadhan. Under the similar circumstances, Supreme Court in Balvir
Singh Vs. State of Punjab (supra), keeping in view the inconsistencies
between the two dying declarations extended benefit of doubt to one of
the appellants. In our opinion, therefore, it would not be safe to uphold
the conviction of appellant Samadhan on the basis of evidence of dying
declarations. However, after having appreciated the two dying
declarations, we find it established beyond doubt that appellant Kamla
Bai actively participated in causing death of the deceased and, therefore,
her conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal
Code by the trial Court was justified.