Life term to woman for burning pregnant daughter-in-law

Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Mamta Tayal awarded life sentence to Geeta Devi relying on the dying declaration of the victim Laxmi who had said that though she faced no demand of or harassment for dowry, her mother-in-law had a general dislike for her.

The victim had said she still wanted to live with her husband despite her mother-in-law's dislike for her.

The court sentenced Geeta Devi saying she committed the "cold-blooded murder" of her daughter-in-law due to her general dislike for her while on the fateful day she committed the ghastly act following a dispute over food.

"There is sufficient circumstantial evidence coupled with the dying declaration of Laxmi to prove beyond reasonable doubt that it was accused Geeta who had poured kerosene oil on Laxmi and set her on fire thereby causing her death," the ASJ said.

"The allegations of demand of dowry and cruelty as levelled by the victim's parents are general, vague and omnibus," the judge added.

Laxmi had told the sub-divisional magistrate in her dying declaration that on April 29, 2006, night when she was lighting the stove to make tea for herself, her mother-in-law poured kerosene oil over her and set her ablaze because she did not like her and used to taunt her regularly.

"On that day, prior to the incident, Geeta had fought with her over food and was angry with her. She further stated that her husband Anil, who had returned from office at that time only, had tried to save her and taken her to hospital," the court noted from her dying statement.

The next day after the incident Laxmi, who was six months pregnant at the time of the incident, in her first statement, had exonerated her mother-in-law stating that she had caught fire accidentally.

However, later when her death became certain, she told the SDM that her mother-in-law tried to kill her and she had made her earlier statement under fear.

The judge said only the second statement can be relied on and not the first one as she had survived for 10 days after the incident and during her first statement she did not foresee her death.

"Apparently, on the very next day of the incident, she did not apprehend that she was going to die. This can be gathered from the statement wherein she asserted that after recovery, she wanted to live with her husband. This reflects the mental status of a newly-married women who was loved by her husband but disliked by her mother­in­law.

"Even after the incident, she wanted to continue her relation with her husband because he was not at fault. But she realised that by putting her mother­in­law in the dock, she cannot restart her married life," the court noted.