IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of legal principles from relevant cases to determine the nature of the offence and the appropriate conviction and sentencing for the appellant.

JUDGMENT :

Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.

1. This criminal appeal preferred by the sole appellant herein under Section 374(2) of the CrPC is directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 28-7-2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), North Bastar Kanker in Sessions Trial No.90/2016, by which the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under with a direction to run both the sentences concurrently: -

2. Case of the prosecution, in short, is that on 7-9-2016 at 8 p.m., at Village Mohpur, Police Station Kanker, the appellant wrongly confined his wife Smt. Manbha Bai in the house of Nammuram – her father, and poured kerosene oil on her body and enlightened matchstick by which she suffered burn injuries to the extent of 75-80%. Smt. Manbha Bai was admitted to the hospital where her dying declaration was recorded vide Ex.P-17 proved by Yogendra Verma (PW-15) – Executive Magistrate, Raipur after having been certified by the doctor of being in fit and conscious state of mind to give statement before recording of the dying declaration. Smt. Manbha Bai succumbed to the burn injuries sustained by her and she died during the course of treatment. Morgue intimation was recorded vide Exs.P-11 & P-15 and FIR was registered vide Ex.P-1 being lodged by Nammuram Nishad (PW-1) – father of the deceased. Inquest over the dead body of the deceased was conducted vide Ex.P-8. Spot map was prepared by the Investigating Officer vide Ex.P-2. Patwari also prepared spot map vide Ex.P-3. Dead body of the deceased was sent for autopsy to Dr. Ambedkar Hospital, Raipur vide Ex.P-9. Autopsy was conducted by Dr. Ulhas Gonnade (PW-8) vide autopsy report Ex.P-12 in which cause of death was stated to be due to cardio respiratory failure as a result of burns (1st to 4th degree) and their complications. Articles like jerrycan, matchstick, matchbox, etc. were seized from the spot vide Ex.P-5 and sent for chemical examination to the FSL, Raipur from where report dated 29-11-2016 was received according to which kerosene oil was found on jerrycan Art. A and particles of kerosene oil were found on burnt soil Art. C and clothes of the deceased Art. D.

3. Statements of witnesses were recorded under Section 161 of the CrPC and after usual investigation, the appellant was charge-sheeted for offences under Sections 342 & 302 of the IPC and the case was committed to the Court of Session, North Bastar Kanker from where the learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC) received the case on transfer for trial and for hearing and disposal in accordance with law where the trial was conducted.

4. The prosecution, in order to prove the offence against the appellant, examined as many as 18 witnesses and brought on record 22 documents Exs.P-1 to P-22 apart from FSL report dated 29-11-2016, though not exhibited. The defence has not examined any witness, however, brought on record four documents Exs.D-1, D-1 to D-3 i.e. the statements of Shamlal Nishad, Smt. Manbha Nishad, Nammuram Nishad and Sevaram Vatti recorded under Section 161 of the CrPC. The accused/appellant was examined under Section 313 of the CrPC in which he denied the circumstances appearing against him and pleaded innocence and false implication.

5. The trial Court after appreciating oral and documentary evidence on record, proceeded to convict the appellant herein for offences under Sections 342 & 302 of the IPC, against which he has preferred this appeal.

6. Mr. Rishi Rahul Soni, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, would submit that the appellant has tried to extinguish the fire which is apparent from the statement of dying declaration Ex.P-17 proved by Yogendra Verma (PW-15) – Executive Magistrate,