JUDGMENT :

This is an appeal preferred by the accused against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 29.04.2010 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No.1, Bellary, in Sessions Case No.84 of 2009 wherein the accused was convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 509, 504, 341, 354, 323 and 305 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the ‘IPC’, for the sake of brevity).

2. Brief facts for the purpose of this appeal are as under:

According to the prosecution, the deceased, a minor girl, aged about 16 years was studying SSLC in Kartikeshwar High School, Taranagar. She sued to attend the school and return to house daily. The accused is also a resident of the said village. He used to tease her. Fifteen days prior to the date of incident, he used vulgar language against her. He was deliberately touching her body by making gestures. He used to tease and harass the deceased-minor girl. The said fact was informed by the minor girl to her father CW-1. The parents of the deceased went to the house of the accused and asked them to advice their son. Enraged by the said incident, the accused, on 30.09.2008 at about 6.00 pm, intentionally insulted the deceased in the presence of her friends and wrongly restrained her, slapped her and pulled her down. He also dragged her by hands. On account of this act by the accused, deceased after returning from school poured kerosene on her body and set herself ablaze to commit suicide. She suffered 90% burn injuries. While she was undergoing treatment in the hospital, she succumbed to the burn injures on 04.10.2008 at 7.30 pm on 01.10.2008. Before that the PSI of Gadiganur Police Station visited the hospital. He ascertained the condition of the deceased. He obtained permission from the Doctor to record the statement of the injured. The statement of the injured was recorded as per Ex.P-13. On the basis of Ex.P-13 Crime No.123 of 2008 was registered and FIR as per Ex.P-10 was delivered to the Court. Thereafter, the Taluka Executive Magistrate on requisition by the police, recorded the dying declaration of the deceased girl in the hospital as per Ex.P-6. The Investigating Officer visited the spot of occurrence and conducted spot panchanama as per Ex.P-2. He prepared seized 2 liter capacity plastic bottle. The inquest panchanama of dead body was done as per Ex.P-3. The school records of the deceased and P.M. report were obtained. After completing investigation, the Investigating Officer filed charge sheet against the accused for the alleged offences. The learned JMFC, committed the case to the Sessions Court for trial as the offence under Section 305 was triable by the Sessions Court. The learned Sessions Judge, after hearing both sides, framed charges and held trial of the case. Learned Sessions Judge found the accused guilty of the offences alleged. Consequently, the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence came to be passed. The said judgment has been challenged by the appellant-accused on the following grounds.

The judgment of the Sessions Court is against the material evidence on record. The Sessions Court has not properly appreciated the oral and documentary evidence on record. There are a lot of contradiction and omission in the evidence of prosecution witnesses. There is delay in filing the complaint. The same has not at all been considered by the Sessions Court. The material witnesses who had witnessed the incident of accused using criminal force on victim have not been examined. The Investigating Officer has not seized the material objects like kerosene, burnt cloth pieces at the time of conducting panchanama. The dying declaration-Ex.P-6 by the deceased is not dated. The place of record and presence of Doctor is mentioned. It was not read over to the deceased. In the complaint, she has put her left thumb impression whereas in the dying declatation, she has signed. In whose presence she has signed is not spoken. There is no consistency in the eviden