A.M. BADAR, J.

1. By this appeal, the appellant/accused, who has been convicted for offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months, in Sessions Case No.42 of 2008 by Judgment and Order dated 23/02/2011 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Islampur, is challenging the said Judgment and Order.

2. According to the prosecution case, as reflected from the police report, the appellant/accused is well acquainted with P.W.No.8 Bandu Dadu Sawant, a mathadi worker, working at Mumbai. P.W.No.8 Bandu Dadu Sawant is resident of Ganesh Nagar, Morewadi, Tal.Shirala, Dist. Sangli. He had two wives and four children, who were residing at Morewadi. The appellant/accused used to help P.W.No.8 Bandu Sawant in cultivating land at Morewadi. He was frequent visitor to the house of P.W.No.8 Bandu Sawant at Morewadi.

3. According to the prosecution case, the appellant/ accused had developed trust in the mind of first wife of P.W.No.8 Bandu Sawant namely Ashatai Bandu Sawant (since deceased). During his financial crunch, initially, the appellant/accused took a gold necklace from Ashatai Sawant for the purpose of pledging it and obtaining money to meet his requirement. Thereafter, the said necklace was returned by the appellant/accused to Ashatai Sawant. The appellant/accused stated to be in need of money again and, therefore, he took gold necklace (Laxmihar) from Ashatai Sawant weighing one and half tola for the purpose of pledging it and obtaining money for meeting his need. Trusting him, Ashatai handed over gold necklace (Laxmihar) to the appellant/ accused. However, the appellant/accused did not return that told necklace (Laxmihar) to Ashatai despite repeated requests. Then, according to the prosecution case, the appellant/accused had been to the house of Ashatai Sawant in the night hours of 23/07/2008. At that time, when Ashatai asked him to return her gold necklace (Laxmihar), the appellant/accused refused and threatened Ashatai that if the same is again demanded, he will not keep her alive.

4. According to the prosecution case, at about 1.00 to 2.00 p.m. on 24/07/2008, the appellant/accused entered in the house of Ashatai Bandu Sawant at Morewadi when there was nobody else in the house. He assaulted her and then sprinkled kerosene on her person and set her ablaze causing her instantaneous death. In that incident the appellant/ accused also sustained burn injury.

5. Information of death of Ashatai Sawant was given by her son P.W.No.5 Avinash Bandu Sawant to his relatives including P.W.No.1 Chandrakant Patil (brother of the deceased), P.W.No.2 Narayan Hari Patil (uncle of the deceased) and P.W.No.8 Bandu Dadu Sawant (husband of the deceased).

6. The FIR (Exh.12) of the crime in question came to be lodged by P.W.No.1 Chandrakant Anandrao Patil on 26/07/2008, which has resulted in registration of Crime No.29 of 2008 for offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code with Kokrud Police Station, Sangli. After taking inquest notes after inspection of dead body, it was sent for autopsy by the police. Spot panchanama came to be recorded. After his discharge from the Rural Hospital, Shirala, the appellant/accused was arrested on 21/08/2008. On the basis of confessional statement of the appellant/ accused recorded on 24/08/2008, his burnt full pant came to be seized. On the basis of his second confessional statement recorded on the very same day, gold necklace (Laxmihar) given to him came to be seized at the instance of the appellant/accused. On completion of investigation, the appellant/accused was charge-sheeted and ultimately, after due trial, he came to be convicted and sentenced as indicated in opening paragraph of this Judgment.

7. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/accused. She vehemently argued that the entire case of prosecution is based o