Rajiv Kumar v. State Of Haryana



   !" !#"
$%&'%(%
% %  %
) % ) *+, -

.#/01

 

   

 

   !% !
2&34 $"4

%
4%&% %





!"


#


$%
!

!

 .

&&& %
4%&% %1$5!%36 '


% 
 "
)*+

,

-.

.%
(%

/0
 
( %$1 /0
#



%"

 " 07.05.2019 Baldev Nagar, District Ambala 307/34/498-A of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC') (Section 307 deleted and 302 added later on)


"



"

% 




%
 
 




 
/0
$
%%

.




"
*45

)+61!


$
 "
*)

0 ,



(
 



" 
(
" %

-
 

45 248+
%% ..


 

 %
$



$

( 
 
("-





$

.
$



 

 "%%
%




$
 


$









(


$
%

""

 



$ 
 %% .



49 248+

 
+44
!



"




  (

 .
  

  
%
! (%


"

"% "







(
 

$ %

$ %
(
( .
( 
:
-.


"%

%.$ 


1# %
% 

1, 


 11%$


 
-  



 

(%;

$

 

( 

  

-.
"
.


"% 

"
 
 .

"









 "

 "
*45

0 ,
$ % 
$




 "

 "
*42

0 ,
$
 1  < 

 
(



"

= 
 "

. $

""

$


 

4+ 248+



%


".
 %

" 

 "

 (%
 "
*42
 )+61!

0

*


% 
(





.

 



 . 
(

" %
 


% %
 %" 
 
"




"
"

4+ 248+







 
 
 

$

0"


"
$
 .
 
 

 "

%.

$

"
"
 


:


 
" 
%


$
$ -.

-"



$


"" %%


  %
".




   %

 



"


%  
( 
  .


"

 .



 %

( 

(




(
"


(

%%$.

%"
 *8+

,


$

  

%
"" 


%% .%


 ( 


%
$
%- %

-


#
 %

$ ..

(
  
(
-

.


"
 




 .


  

(
%%$

)

'

%  

" %






 






0

 . 
(





 
%% .
.




#
%


"

"% 
(




$ "

" 

- 
%"







" %
(



  "
89)

,

$
%

" 
(
>"%
.

.


46 248+
! <

1*

$ "




"% %
 



 %


(




( 

11%$

" 
%=




11%$

 =

%.
$


""

..
(

.

 (
 .
. 


 

$
-  
 



%.








 

(%;

%
 

$
%

 $ 

 



0

 .






" 
( 

.


(
"



.
 "% 



"

 

 ""
%% .
.



 .


" 

 $


$%
(


 %

""%



%
 "



 . 
 
 

 

(
%%$

0



%  
" %



$ %%

%  
" %

" (%
% .


.

.

" "

%%

6.

The petitioner is alleged to have set his own wife ablaze as on 07.05.2019 by pouring kerosene upon her and then by burning her with the

 help of matchstick. She survived for two days after the incident. In her statement as recorded before a Magistrate which is to be considered as her dying declaration, she is shown to have categorically stated that it was the present petitioner who had set her ablaze. The allegations against the petitioner are quite grave in nature. There is nothing on record to show that there would be any undue delay in conclusion of the trial. Keeping in view the gravity of offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioner, the quantum of sentence which the conviction may entail and the attendant facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered opinion that the petition does not deserve to be allowed. Hence the same is dismissed.

0

"%  
( 


(
 %%

( "  


<











"

"





  
 .
%" 






 "

7%
4%&% %8 $") .#/01