ASHABAI & ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                   (2013] 1 S.C.R. 115

                    ASHABAI & ANR.                             A
                            v.
               STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
           (Criminal Appeal No. 1062 of 2008)
                    JANUARY 4, 2013
                                                               B
      [P. SATHASIVAM AND RANJAN GOGOi, JJ.]

    PENAL CODE 1860:

    ss. 302134 and 498-A/34 - Death of a married woman         c
caused by bum injuries - Dying declaration and oral evidence
establishing ill-treatment to deceased and role of accused
persons in causing her death - Medical evidence and oral
eviderice supporting prosecution version - Conviction of
mother-in-law (who died during pendency of appeal before       0
Supreme Court) and two sisters-in-laws (appellants) of
deceased and sentence of life imprisonment - Affirmed by
High Court - Held: There is no infirmity in the order of
conviction and sentence recorded by trial court and affirmed
by High Court - Evidence Act, 1872 - s.32 - Sentence!          E
Sentencing.

    EVIDENCE ACT, 1872:

      s. 32(1) - Multiple dying declarations - Held: When there
are multiple dying declarations, each one has to be assessed- - F
and evaluated independently on its own merit as to its
evidentiary value and one cannot be rejected because of
certain variation in the other- In the instant case, prosecution
relied on four dying declarations of the deceased - At the time
of recording of these statements, medical officers on duty had G
certified that the deceased was fully conscious and was in a
fit state of mind to make the same - Though, in one of the
statement, the deceased implicated two more persons (who
were acquitted by trial court) she was consistent about the role
                            115                                H
    116      SUPREME COURT REPORTS             [2013) 1 S.C.R.


A played by her mother-in-law and sisters-in-law (appellants) -
  The Court fully endorses the view expressed by trial court and
  affirmed by High Court about acceptability of four dying
  declarations implicating the appellants.
          CRIME AGAINST WOMEN:
B
       Punishment - Held: In the cases of bride burning, cruelty,
  suicide, sexual harassment, rape, suicide by married women
  etc. a complete overhaul of the system is a must in the form
  of deterrent punishment for the offenders - Sentence/
C Sentencing - Punishment.

       Consequent upon the death of a woman by burn
  injuries received by her in her matrimonial home, her two
  sisters-in-law (A-2 and A-3, the appellants) the mother-in-
D law (A-1) and two others faced trial. The case of the
  prosecution was that the deceased was ill-treated by A·
  1, A-2 and A-3 as she could not conceive a child; that on
  the date of occurrence, on the instigation of A-2 and A-3,
  A-1 poured kerosene on her and set her on fire. Four
E dying declarations were recorded of the victim on the day
  of incident and the following day. The victim succumbed
  to her injuries after 1% months of the incident. The trial
  court convicted A-1, A-2 and A-3 u/ss 498-A/34 and 302/
  34 IPC and sentenced them to one year's imprisonment
  u/s 498-A/34 IPC and imprisonment for life u/s 302134 IPC.
F The High Court affirmed the conviction and the sentence.
  A-2 and A-3 filed Crl. A. No. 1062 of 2008 whereas A-1
  filed Crl. A. No. 1063 of 2008. A-1 died during the
  pendency of the appeal and her appeal was dismissed
  as abated.
G
      It was contended for the appellants that there were
  four dying declarations in the instant case and there were
  contradictions and improvements which were not
  mentioned in the first two dying declarations, and as the
H version of the incident given in all the four dying
   ASHABAI & ANR. v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA              117

 declaration was inconsistent, no reliance could be placed   A
 on them.

     Dismissing the appeal, the Court.

      HELD: 1.1. The statement made by the deceased by
 way of a declaration is admissible in evidence u/s 32(1) 8
 of the Evidence Act. It is not in dispute that her statement
 relates to the cause of her death. In that event, it qualifies
 the criteria mentioned in s. 32(1) of the Evidence ·Act.
 There is no particular form or procedure prescribed for
 recording a dying declaration nor is it required to be C
 recorded-only by a Magistrate. As a general rule, it is
 advisable to get the evidence of the .:cteclarant certified
 from a doctor. In appropriate cases, the satisfaction of the
 person ·recording the statement reg_arding the state of
 mind of the deceased would also be sufficient to hold that· D
 the deceased was in a position to make a statement. [para
 12] [126-G-H; 127-A-B]
       1.2. It is settled law that if the prosecution solely
  depends on the dying declaration, the normal rule is that E
  the courts must exercise due care and caution to ensure
  genuineness of the dying declaration, keeping in mind
  that the accused had no opportunity to test the veracity
  of the statement of the deceased by cross-examination.
  The law does not insist upon the corroboration of dying
  declaration before it can be accepted. The insistence of F
  corroboration to a dying declaration is only a rule of
  prudence. When the court is satisfied that the dying
  declaration is voluntary, not tainted by tutoring or
  animosity, and is not a product of the imagination of the
. declarant, in that event, there is no impediment in G
  convicting the accused on the basis of such dying
  declaration. [para 12] [127-B-E]
     1.3. When there are multiple dying declarations, each
 one has to be assessed and evaluated independently on       H
    118      SUPREME COURT REPORTS               [2013] 1 S.C.R.

A its own merit as to its eyidentiary value and one cannot
  be rejected because of certain variation in the other. [para
  12] [127-E-F]

       1.4. In the instant case, though, in one of the
  statement, the deceased implicated two more persons
8
  (who were acquitted by the trial Court) she was
  consistent about the role played by her mother-in-law and
  her sisters-in-law (the appellants). It is relevant to note that
  the incident took place in the bedroom of the deceased.
C It is also clear that she was subjected to torture as she
  had not conceived a child even after three years of the
  marriage and in all the four dY,ing declarations, she was
  conscious in mentioning the role of her mother-in-law
  and sisters-in-law. There is no contradiction as to the
  main aspect, namely, implicating her mother-in-law and
D sisters-in-law as well as the role played by them. [para 11]
  [125-F-H]

       1.5. At the time of recording of the statements of the
  victim, medical officers on duty had certified that she was
E fully conscious and was in a fit state of mind to make the
  same. The persons who recorded the four dying
  declarations were examined and were also cross-
  examined about the statement made by the deceased and
  recorded by them. In such circumstances, this Court fully
F endorses the view expressed by the trial court and
  affirmed by the High Court about the acceptability of four
  dying declarations implicating the mother-in-law and
  sisters-in-law (the appellants). [para 13] [127-G; 128-A-B]
        1.6. As regards oral evidence, PW-1 is the mother of
G the deceased. She explained about the marriage of her
  daughter and the strained relationship with her family
  members including the appellants. PW-2, the elder
  brother of the deceased, deposed about the torture and
  ill-treatment meted out to the deceased in her matrimonial
H home, and the burn injuries sustained by her. He also
  ASHABAI & ANR. v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA                 119

stated that when he met her in the hospital, she was             A
conscious and disclosed that her mother-in-law and
sisters-in-law put her on fire. The analysis of the oral
evidence of PWs and medical evidence clearly shows
that the deceased was in a fit state of mind to make dying
declarations and her statements in those dying                   B
declarations are consistent and truthful. There is no
infirmity in the order of conviction and sentence recorded
by the trial Judge and affirmed by the High Court. (para
14,15 and 17] (128-C-D; F-G; 129-8-C]

      1.7. In view of clinching evidence led in by the C
prosecution, there cannot be any leniency in favour of the
appellants, who are sisters-in-law of the deceased and at
whose instance the deceased was burnt at the hands of
her mother-in-law. Accordingly, the conviction of the
appellants u/ss. 302/34 and 498-A/34 IPC and sentence of D
life imprisonment awarded by trial court and affirmed by
High Court are upheld. (para 2, 18] (121-C; 129-F]

    2. In spite of stringent legislations in order to curb the
deteriorating c~r.jition of women across the country, the        E
cases relating to bride burning, cruelty, suicide, sexual
harassment, rape, suicide by married women etc. a
complete overhaul of the system is a must in the form of
deterrent punishment for the offenders so that the
problem can be affectively dealt with. [para 18] (129-D]         F
    CRIMINAL AP PELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal
No. 1062 of 2008.
    From the Judgment & Order dated 11.04.2007 of the High
Court of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad in Criminal Appeal No.      G
252 of 2005.
    Sudhanshu S. Choudhari, Rajshree Dubey, Naresh Kumar,
Sunil Kumar Verma for the Appellants.
                                                                 H
    . 120       SUPREME COURT REPORTS            [2013] 1 S.C.R.

A       Aprajita Singh, Asha Gopalan Nair, Ravindra Keshavrao
    Adsure for the Respondent.
            The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
       P. SATHASIVAM, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the
B judgment and order dated 11.04.2007 passed by the High
  Court of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad in Criminal Appeal No.
  252 of 2005 whereby the High Court dismissed the appeal filed
  by the appellants herein and confirmed the order dated
  30.03.2005 passed by the Court of llnd Ad-hoc Additional
c Sessions Judge, Jalgaon in Sessions Case No. 165 of 2003.
            2. Brief facts:
        {a) On 28.02.2000, Vandana Raghunath Tayade {since
  deceased) was married to one Raghunath Puna Tayade at
D Village Khirwad, Taluq Raver, Dist. Jalgaon, Maharashtra. After
  marriage, she was staying at her matrimonial home in a joint
  family consisting of her husband, Kesharbai (A-1) mother-in-
  law, father-in-law and two sisters-in-law, viz., Ashabai and
  Kavita (appellants herein). Since there was no issue from the
E marriage, she was ill-treated by her mother-in-law and sisters-
  in-law. On that count, they used to harass her and both the
  families were not in good terms.
        (b) On 05.03.2003, at about 1645 hrs., when Vandana was
   in her matrimonial home, Kesharbai (mother-in-law), in order
F to get rid of her, poured kerosene on her body and Ashabai
  and Kavita (appellants herein) - sisters-in-law instigated
  Kesharbai to lit the fire by using a matchstick. She started
  shouting and caught hold of her mother-in-law in the burnt
  condition. Vandana and Kesharbai, both were taken to the
G Railway Hospital, Bhusawal and her statement was recorded
  on the very same day. Between 05.03.2003 to 06.03.2003, the
  injured gave, in all, 4 dying declarations one by one to the
  authorities concerned. On 18.04.2003, she succumbed to her
  injuries and the post-mortem was conducted on the same day
H and a case being AD. No. 15 of 2003 was registered.
   ASHABAI & ANR. v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA                      121
              [P. SATHASIVAM, J.]
     (c) After investigation, charge sheet was filed against six      A
accused persons, i.e., Kesharbai (A-1), Ashabai Puna Tayade
(A-2) and Kavita Ajay Medhe (A-3)-appellants herein, Puna
Mitharam Tayade, Shobha Sitaram Tayade and Sitaram Ramaji
Tayade and the case was committed to the Court of the llnd
Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon and numbered as             B
Sessions Case No. 165 of 2003. The Additional Se~sions
Judge, by order dated 30.03.2005, convicted A-1, A-2 and A-
3 under Section 498-A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860 (in short 'IPC' ) and sentenced them to undergo
RI for 1 year along with a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each, in default, to   c
further undergo RI for 3 months. They were also convicted under
Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC and sentenced to
suffer imprisonment for life along with a fine of Rs. 2,000/- each,
in default, to further undergo RI for 6 months arid acquitted the
other accused persons.                                                o
      (d) Challenging the said judgment, the appellants herein
filed Criminal Appeal No. 252 of 2005 before the High Court.
By impugned order dated 11.04.2007, the High Court,
dismissed the appeal filed by the appellants herein and
confirmed their conviction and sentence passed against them           E.
by the trial Court.

      3. Heard Mr. Sudhanshu S. Choudhari, learned counsel far
the appellants-accused and Ms. Aprajita Singh, learned counsel
for the State.                                                        F

Discussion:
     4. The present appeal is by Ashabai (A-2) and Kavita Ajay
Medhe (A-3), both sisters-in-law of the deceased. Kesharbai
(A-1) - mother-in-law of the deceased, who was also convicted         G
and sentenced to RI for life filed a separate appeal being
Criminal Appeal No. 1063 of 2008 before this Court. Since
she died on 10.02.204 2, by order dated 13.12.2012, this Court
dismissed her appeal as abated. Therefore, we are concerned
about the present appellants, namely, Ashabai (A-2) and Kavita        H
    122      SUPREME COURT REPORTS                [2013] 1 S.C.R.


A Ajay Medhe (A-3) respectively.

        5. The marriage of the deceased Vandana with one
  Raghunath was solemnized on 28.02.2000 and her death
  occurred on 18.04.2003, i.e., her married life came to an end
8 within 3 years of her marriage. The entire prosecution case
  lies on 4 dying declarations made by the deceased and the oral
  evidence of PWs 1, 2, 3 and 11.

    Dying Declaration No. 1 (Exh.76):

c       6. The first dying declaration was recorded by Shri Dhondu
  (PW-14), Sub-inspector of Police, Sarkarwade P.S., Nasik on
  05.03.2003. In her statement before PW-14, she narrated that
  her marriage was solemnized on 28.02.2000 at Khirwar and
  she was residing at Shantinagar, Someshwar Colony,
0 Bhusawal along with her husband-Raghunath, Punna - father-
  in-law, Kesharbai - mother-in-law, Ashabai and Kavita - sisters-
  in-law. She further stated that her husband was working as an
  Assistant Station Master at Bhusawal, her father-in-law retired
  from Railways and she along with her mother-in-law and sisters-
E in-law stayed at home. As she was not able to conceive even
  after 3 years of marriage, her mother-in-law and sisters-in-law
  always used to abuse her that she was 'barren'. They used to
  say that she should not stay in the house and better she would
  die. On 04.01.2003, all the three assaulted her in front of her
F brother. On 05.03.2003, at about 7 o'clock in the morning,
  when she entered into the house along with her husband after
  their return from Mumbai, her mother-in-law and sisters-in-law,
  viz., Ashabai and Kavita shouted that the barren lady has come
  and telling her husband that he should not keep the unproductive
  lady in their house. After quarrelling with her mother-in-law, her
G husband went for duty. At about 4.45 p.m., when she came to
  her bedroom after taking a wash and was standing facing
  towards east in the place in between the cupboard and the cot.
  at that time, her mother-in-law - Kesharbai (A-1) came frem
  behind with her sisters-in-law Ashabai and Kavita. She was
H holding a tin of kerosene in her hands and she poured kerosene
   ASHABAI & ANR. v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA                    123
              [P. SATHASIVAM, J.]
on her from neck to legs. While doing so, her sisters-in-law         A
directed her mother-in-law to light the matchstick. Accordingly,
the mother-in-law lit the matchstick. On seeing this, her father-
in-law arid sisters-in-law poured water on her and extinguished
the fire. The above statement is duly certified by the Doctor
on duty- Shri T.F. Ramesh that she was conscious and able to         B
give a statement. It is clear that in this declaration she has not
implicated her husband and father-in-law. On the other hand,
she asserted that she was tortured by her mother-in-law (A-1)
and sisters-in-law (A-2 and A-3). She also specified that it was
her mother-in-law who poured kerosene on the direction of her        c
sisters-in-law.

Dying Declaration No.2 (Exh. 45):

     7. This statement was made by the deceased before the
Executive Magistrate, Bhusawal on 05.03.2003 at 11.10 p.m.           D
which was marked as Exh. 45 and is in the form of questions
and answers. When the Executive Magistrate asked what had
happened on that day, she answered that "my mother-in-law by
name, Kesharbai Puna Tayde poured kerosene on me and
burnt". She further mentioned that the said incident took place      E
at about 4.30 to 5.00 p.m. on 05.03.2003. In respect of another
question by the Magistrate, namely, who were there in the
house, she answered that her mother-in-law and sisters-in-law,
by name, Ashabai and Kavita were there in the house and they
told to light the matchstick. She also mentioned that at the         F
relevant time, her husband and father-in-law were not in the
house. The very same doctor, who certified her condition in
the statement recorded by PW-14 also certified .that the
declarant was conscious to give a statement. ·. He also
mentioned the date and time as 05.03.2003 at 11.10 p.m. This         G
declaration, which was duly recorded by the Executive
Magistrate, Bhusawal (PW-7) clearly shows that it was her
mother-in-law who poured kerosene on her on the direction of
her sisters-in-law (A-2 and A-3).
                                                                     H
   124       SUPREME COURT REPORTS              [2013) 1 S.C.R.

A Dying Declaration No.3 (Exh. 47):

        8. On 06.03.2003, injured Vandana again made a
  statement before the Executive Magistrate, Bhusawal at 19:25
  hrs. Here again, her statement was recorded in the form of
  questions and answers. The said document has been marked
8
  as Exh.47. After narrating that her marriage took place on
  28.02.2000 at Khirwar, she informed that her mother-in-law and
  father-in-law used to quarrel with her and her husband never
  used to say anything. No doubt, in this statement, she
  mentioned that she was threatened by Shobha Sitaram Tayade
C (sister-in-law) and Sitaram Ramji Tayade (husband of Shobha
  Sitaram Tayade). After m.entioning their names, (both of them
  were acquitted by the trial Court) she further narrated that
  amongst them, her mother-in-law poured kerosene on her and
  sisters-in-law (Ashabai and Kavita) were standing by closing
D the door. For another question, namely, whether she had
  suspicion on anyone, she answered that she was tried to be
  burnt by her mother-in-law Kesharbai, Ashabai, Shobha, Kavita,
  Sitaram Ramji Tayade. While recording the above statement,
  here again, duty Doctor Dr. C.N. Pimprikar certified that
E Vandana was fully conscious to give a statement. He also
  mentioned the time and date of recording of the above
  statement as 7:25 p.m. dated 06.03.2003.

       9. Learned counsel for the appellants pointed out certain
F contradictions and improvements which were not mentioned in
  her first two statements. It is true that in the third statement
  made before the Executive Magistrate, she implicated Shobha
  and Sitaram Ramji Tayade and according to her, they also
  threatened her along with her mother-in-law and sisters-in-law.
G Merely because she mentioned two other names, who were
  acquitted by the trial Court, it cannot be presumed that her
  earlier statements were unacceptable. However, it is to be
  noted that even in the third statement before the Executive
  Magistrate duly recorded by him, she mentioned the role of her
  mother-in-law and sisters-in-law. There is no reason to
H
   ASHABAI & ANR. v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA                     125
              [P. SATHASIVAM, J.]
disbelieve or reject the above statement as claimed by learned       A
counsel for the appellants.

Dying Declaration No.4 (Exh. 36):

       10. On 06.03.2003 itself, at about 7.30 p.m., again the
injured Vandana made a statement before Shri Dilip, Sub-             8
Inspector of Police who was examined as PW-6 and the
statement was marked as Exh. 36. Here again, in respect of
the questions put by the recording officer, she answered by
implicating her mother-in-law and sisters-in-law. For a specific
question, namely, on 05.03.2003, whether she was at home             C
and how she got burn injuries and who was responsible for the
same, she answered that "on 05.03.2003, I was at home only.
At about 5 o'clock, her mother-in-law, sisters-in-law poured
kerosene and burnt". Here again, she specifically implicated
her mother-in-law and sisters-in-law for pouring kerosene and        D
titting fire.

     11. Learned counsel for the appellants argued that the
version of incident as given by the deceased in all the four dying
declarations is inconsistent and no reliance can be placed on        E
it. We have already referred to the persons who recorded all
the four statements, her condition and the certificate issued by
the doctor as well as the contents of the statements. Though,
in one of the statement, she implicated two more persons (who
were acquitted by the trial Court) she was consistent about the
                                                                     F
role played by her mother-in-law and her sisters-in-law
(appellants before us). It is relevant to note that the incident
took place in the bedroom of the deceased. It is also clear that
she was subjected to torture as she had not conceived a child
even after three years of the marriage and in all the four dying
declarations, she was conscious in mentioning the role of her        G
mother-in-law and sisters-in-law. We are satisfied that there
is no contradiction as to the main aspect, namely, implicating
her mother-in-law and sisters-in-law as well as the role played
by them.
                                                                     H
    126        SUPREME COURT REPORTS               [2013) 1 S.C.R.


A Evidentiary value of Dying Declaration:

        12. About the evidentiary value of dying declaration of the
    deceased, it is relevant to refer Section 32(1) of the Indian
    Evidence Act, 1872, which reads as under:-
B         "32. Cases in which statement of relevant fact by
          person who is dead or cannot be found, etc., is
          relevant.- Statements, written or verbal, of relevant facts
          made by a person who is dead, or who cannot be found,
          or who has become incapable of giving evidence, or
c         whose attendance cannot be procured without an amount
          of delay or expense which, under the circumstances of the
          case, appears to the Court unreasonable, are themselves
          relevant facts in the following cases:-

D         (1) when it relates to cause of death.- When the
          statement is made by a person as to the cause of his
          death, or as to any of the circumstances of the transaction
          which resulted in his death, in cases in which the cause of
          that person's death comes into question.
E         Such statements are relevant whether the person who
          made them was or was not, at the time when they were
          made, under expectation of death, and whatever may be
          the nature of the proceeding in which the cause of his
          death comes into question.
F
          (2) ......... .



          (8) ........ "
G
  It is clear from the above provision that the statement made by
  the deceased by way of a declaration is admissible in evidence
  under Section 32(1) of the Evidence Act. It is not in dispute
  that her statement relates to the cause of her death. In that
H event, it qualifies the criteria mentioned in Section 32(1) of the
  ASHABAI & ANR. v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA                       127
             [P. SATHASIVAM, J.]
Evidence Act. There is no particular form or procedure                 A
prescribed for recording a dying declaration nor it is required
to be recorded only by a Magistrate. As a general rule, it is
advisable to get the evidence of the declarant certified from a
doctor. In appropriate cases, the satisfaction of the person
recording the statement regarding the state of mind of the             B
deceased would also be sufficient to hold that the deceased
was in a position to make a statement. It is settled law that if
the prosecution solely depends on the dying declaration, the
normal rule is that the courts must exercise due care and caution
to ensure genuineness of the dying declaration, keeping in mind        c
that the accused had no opportunity to test the veracity of the
statement of the deceased by cross-examination. As rightly
observed by the High Court, the law does not insist upon the
corroboration of dying declaration before it can be accepted.
The insistence of corroboration to a dying declaration is only a       0
rule of prudence. When the Court is satisfied that the dying
declaration is voluntary, not tainted by tutoring or animosity, and
is not a product of the imagination of the declarant, in that event,
there is no impediment in convicting the accused on the basis
of such dying declaration. When there are multiple dying               E
declaratiqns, each dying declaration has to be separately
assessed and evaluated and assess independently on its own
merit as to its evidentiary value and one cannot be rejected
because of certain variation in the other.

     13. We have already noted that in the present case,               F
prosecution relied on four dying declarations of the deceased.
We have also noted that at the time of recording of these
statements, medical officers on duty had certified that the
deceased was fully conscious and was in a fit state of mind to
make the same. As a matter of fact, the deceased has given             G
proper replies to the questions put to her by various authorities.
Further, it is not in dispute that the incident occurred on
05.03.2003 and she sustained 54% burns and, ultimately, she
died only on 18.04.2003. In other words~ she survived for about
1 ~ (one and a half) month which speaks for the fitness of the         H
    128      SUPREME COURT REPORTS               [2013] 1 S.C.R.


A declarant to make a statement. The persons who recorded the
  four dying declarations were examined as PWs 14, 7 and 6
  and they were also cross-examined about the statement made
  by the deceased and recorded by them. In such circumstances,
  we fully endorse the view expressed by the trial Court and
B affirmed by the High Court about the acceptability of four dying
  declarations implicating the mother-in-law and sisters-in-law
  (appellants herein).

    Oral Evidence of PWs 1, 2 and 11:

C      14. Malatabai (PW-1) is the mother of the deceased
  Vandana. She explained about the marriage of her daughter
  and the strained relationship with her family members including
  the present appellants. Sanjay (PW-2) - elder brother of the
  deceased Vandana, in his evidence has stated that he along
D with her mother took the deceased to her matrimonial home
  on 04.01.2003 and as soon as the deceased entered into the
  house A-1, A-2, A-3 and A-5 assaulted her in their presence.
  He also stated that when he protested, they also assaulted him
  and, thereafter, he informed his parents about the same. In
E response to this information, his father and maternal uncle came
  to the matrimonial home of the deceased but none of them were
  allowed to enter the house to meet the deceased.

        15. PW-11, maternal uncle of the deceased, also narrated
  about the marriage of the deceased with her husband. He also
F said that on receipt of information about the incident of burning,
  he rushed to the Railway Hospital, Bhusawal and enquired
  about the deceased. He noticed that Vandana sustained burn
  injuries. However, she was conscious and he asked her as to
  what had happened. She disclosed that her mother-in-law and
G sisters-in-law put her on fire. PW-11 also stated that Vandana
  was in the Hospital for about one and a half month.

        16. Apart from the above witnesses, prosecution has also
    examined the doctors who certified her fitness while making the
H
     ASHABAI & ANR. v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA                   129
                [P. SATHASIVAM, J.]
  statement, the doctor who conducted her post-mortem and            A
  I.Os., who completed the investigation and filed charge sheet.
  Conclusion:

        17. The above analysis clearly shows that the deceased
  was in a fit state of mind to make dying declarations and her 8
  statements in those dying declarations are consistent and
  truthful. In addition to the same, the prosecution also examined
  PWs 1, 2 and 11 as well as the Doctors, I.Os., and other
  witnesses in support of their claim. We do not find any infirmity
  in the· order of conviction and sentence recorded by the trial C
  Judge and affirmed by the High Court.

       18. In spite of stringent legislations in order to curb the
  deteriorating condition of women across the country, the cases
, related to bride burning, cruelty, suicide, sexual harassment,     o
  rape, suicide by married women etc. have increased and are
  taking place day by day. A complete overhaul of the system is
  a must in the form of deterrent punishment for the offenders so
  that we can effectively deal with the problem. In the case on
  hand, Vandana died within 3 years of her marriage at the           E
  instance of her mother-in-law and sisters-in-law due to the
  harassment meted out to her because of the inability to
  conceive a child and she was poured kerosene and burnt to
  death. Even though, the mother-in-law, who also filed a
  separate appeal, died on 10.02.2012, in view of clinching
                                                                     F
  evidence led in by the prosecution, there cannot be any leniency
  in favour of the appellants, who are sisters-in-law of the
  deceased and at whose instance the deceased was burnt at
  the hands of her mother-in-law.

    · 19. Accordingly, while agreeing with the conclusion arrived    G
  at by the trial Court and affirmed by the High Court, we find no
  merit in the appeal. Consequently, the same is dismissed.

  R.P.                                        Appeal dismissed.