JUDGMENT - BATTA R.K., J.:---The appellant was tried for murder of his wife by pouring kerosene and setting her on fire under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant denied the charge and the prosecution examined in all 18 witnesses in support of the charge.

2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the appellant was suspecting the character of his wife and used to beat her after taking alcohol. On 31-7-1996 between 8.00 and 9.00 p.m., the appellant under influence of liquor, assaulted the deceased, pouring kerosene on her and set her on fire. The appellant and the deceased were the only persons in the room in question where the incident is said to have taken place. Their children were sleeping outside in the verandah. After the deceased was set on fire, the deceased tried to go out of the house, but the appellant prevented her and ultimately she forcibly came out the house and jumped into the tank where there was water. The father-in-law of the deceased as also the children of the deceased met the deceased when she came out in burning condition. The deceased was taken to the hospital, but the appellant did not accompany them. In the hospital, her statement was first recorded by Head Constable and dying declaration was recorded by the Executive Magistrate. Subsequently also one more dying declaration was recorded by the Head Constable. The deceased died on 4th August, 1996 in the hospital at Nagpur.

3. The case of the appellant that he is not at all involved in burning the deceased and his case is that while he was sleeping in the room, the deceased was sleeping in the kitchen. At about 11.00 p.m., the deceased shouted after which his son Hiraman jumped from the wall and came inside the room, after which both of them extinguished the fire and in the process, the appellant also suffered burn injuries on the leg. According to the appellant, the deceased was unconscious and did not talk with anyone. She was taken to the hospital, but he could not accompany her since by the time he came after changing his clothes, they left for hospital. On the next day morning, he came to the hospital. The deceased was throughout unconscious and doctor had taken her false statement and thumb impression.

4. The trial Court accepted the dying declarations and the statement of Durga (P.W. 5), daughter of the deceased and the accused, besides other evidence on record. After considering the entire evidence on record, the trial Court found the appellant guilty for murder of his wife under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default, R.I. for six months. The appellant was in custody since 2-8-1996 and the benefit of set off under section 428 of Cri.P.C. was given to the appellant.

5. Learned Advocate for the appellant urged before us that none of the dying declarations upon which reliance has been placed by the prosecution can be accepted since necessary endorsements in law have not been obtained from the doctor; that there is no material to show that the doctor made endorsements after examining the deceased; that there are inter se discrepancies between the three dying declarations and that the prosecution case is not supported by a number of prosecution witnesses including Hiraman (P.W. 1), step son of the deceased and her daughter Sharda (P.W. 3). It was also pointed out by learned Advocate for the appellant that according to the panch (P.W. 12), both the thumbs of the deceased were burnt and as such the prosecution case that the thumb impressions of the deceased were taken on the dying declarations cannot be accepted. Learned Advocate for the appellant further urged that the appellant had in fact tried to extinguish fire and in the process had received injuries on his person and that it is a case of suicide/accidental burning and the prosecution has not been able to prove that the appellant had murdered the deceased.

6. Learned A.P.P., on the other hand, urged b

Click Here to Read the rest of this document