Pappu @ Arvind And Anr. vs The State Of M.P on 30 June, 2011
4. Learned counsel for the appellants has
contended that the findings of trial court that the
prosecution proved the offence against the appellants
3
Cr.A.No.501/2008 Raj Kumar alias Pappu & another
Vs. State of M.P.
beyond reasonable doubt, are perverse. There is no
evidence that the appellants had poured kerosene on the
deceased and ablaze her. The evidence of Ramkrishna
Pyasi (P.W.1) is not reliable because there are so many
omissions and contradictions. The dying declaration of the
deceased in the shape of FIR does not inspire confidence
because the deceased was alive for three days when she
was admitted in the hospital and the Investigating Agency
had not taken any step to get the dying declaration
recorded by an Executive Magistrate. It is further
submitted by the counsel that the statements of other
witnesses recorded by the Investigating Officer under
section 161 of CrPC do not support the prosecution
version. Hence, the appellants are liable for acquittal.