JUDGMENT :

HITESH KUMAR SARMA, J.

1. This appeal is preferred from jail against the judgment and order dated 12.5.2016, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Golaghat, in Sessions Case No. 81 of 2011, convicting the accused-appellant, under section 302 of the Penal Code, 1860, and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000, in default, further simple imprisonment for a period of one month.

2. I have heard Mr. I. Hussain, learned amicus curiae, appearing on behalf of accused-appellant and Mr. B.J. Dutta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam.

3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 9.3.2011, the accused-appellant, Bijoy Nayak, confined his wife/deceased, Jayanti Nayak, inside his house, severely assaulted her and set fire on her person after pouring kerosene oil on her body. She was taken to Bokakhat Primary Health Centre immediately after the occurrence, and thereafter, shifted to KK Civil Hospital, Golaghat, where she succumbed to her bum injuries.

4. The informant/PW2, the father of the deceased, lodged the ejahar, in respect of the above occurrence, with the Kamargaon Police Station. On receipt of the FIR, Kamargaon Police registered a case, being Kamargaon Police Station Case No. 16/2011, under section 342/302 of the IPC, investigated into it, collected evidence and, after completion of investigation, laid the charge sheet against the accused-appellant, under section 342/302 of the IPC. In the midst of investigation, inquest and post mortem examination over the dead body of the deceased were done. Dying declaration of the deceased was recorded by the doctor of KK Civil Hospital, Golaghat. There was seizure of one 5 litres plastic gallon and a burnt match stick with a match box containing 13 sticks from the place of occurrence by the Investigating Police Officer.

5. After exhausting all required formalities, the learned Sessions Judge, Golathat framed a formal charge against the accused-appellant, under section 302 of the IPC. The accused-appellant pleaded innocence thereto and claimed to be tried. Therefore, the trial commenced.

6. In this case, prosecution examined 10 witnesses and the defence examined none. The accused-appellant, in his statement, recorded under section 313, Cr.PC, denied the accusation levelled against him.

7. After conclusion of the trial, learned Sessions Judge, Golaghat found the accused-appellant guilty under section 302 of the IPC and convicted and sentenced him accordingly, as indicated above.

8. We have scanned the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. We have also perused the records of the learned trial court including the judgment appealed against.

9. Before we evaluate the evidence on record, let us see, from the evidence of the autopsy doctor, examined as PW3, the findings recorded by him in the post mortem examination report, Ext. 2. The Ext. 2 records as follows:

“External appearance:

A dead body of an adult female, medium height, swarthy with swarthy complexion with long black hair. Eyes closed and rigor mortis present. The skin of the whole body from below the neck is burnt with multiple black blister. There is deep bum in some parts of the body. Percentage of bum is about 80%.

Cranium and spinal canal = all congested.

Tharax = Wall = Superficial bum with areas of deep burn.

Ribs and cartilage are normal.

Heart = Right chamber contains blood and left chamber empty. Others = congested.

Abdomen = Wall-Multiple blister due to bum.

Stomach-congested and contains undigested food material.

Small intestine-congested and contains semi-digested found.

Large intestine-congested and contains faecal matter.

Others-congested.

Liver-congested, Spleen-congested, Kidneys-congested. Bladder-congested and contains small amount of wine. Organs of generation-healthy and uterus is normal in size.

The dead body has got black skin blister and more than 80% bum all over the body except the head, neck and sole.

The bum is ante mortem in nature. Rigor mortis present, so time