Shrivastava, J. -- 1. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 7.9.2005 passed by learned Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur in S.T. No.88/2004 convicting the appellant under section 302 of the IPC and thereby sentencing him to suffer life imprisonment and fine of Rs.5,000/-; in default further RI for 5 months, the appellant has knocked the door of this Court by preferring this appeal under section 374(2) of the CrPC.

2. In brief, the case of the prosecution is that on 12.11.2003 in the afternoon at about 2:00 p.m., an information was received in the Police Station Bhedaghat that one lady Ratna Bai (hereinafter to be referred to as ‘the deceased’) has been brought in burning condition. The said information was reduced in Roznamcha No.473. Thereafter, D.K. Mishra (PW10), ASI, P.S. Bhedaghat recorded Dehati Nalishi on 12.11.2003 at 19:45 hours according to which the deceased got married to her husband namely Garibdas @ Pappu (the appellant). On 3.11.2003, the father of deceased brought the deceased from her nuptial home to his own residence at Bhedaghat. It is further case of the prosecution that appellant had gone to his nuptial home at Bhedaghat, where deceased was residing with her parents, to bring her with him. The parents of the deceased told that after lunch, he may carry the deceased with him. On 12.11.2003, when the father of deceased had gone to discharge labour work and her mother had gone to take bath at Talaiya and the deceased was alone in the house along with two small daughters of her younger sister, at that juncture, it was told by the appellant that deceased is having some illicit relations with her brother-in-law (sister’s husband), therefore, he will not take her back to his home but will kill her. Despite, the deceased told that she is not having any illicit relations with her brother-in-law, the appellant did not agree and brought a can of kerosene and poured it upon the deceased and thereafter lit the fire with intention to kill her. On receiving the burn injuries, the deceased started screaming and came out of her house in the burning condition. On seeing the deceased in that condition, her mother Narmada Bai (PW4), sister Anita (PW5) and Sunita (PW6) rushed towards her and extinguished the fire. The appellant after setting up the fire fled away from the place of occurrence. The mother of the deceased brought her to the Medical College at Jabalpur, where she was treated.

3. Upon dehati nalishi, the investigation was made by the investigating agency. The dying declaration of the deceased and statement of witnesses were recorded. The deceased died after 3 days on 15.11.2003, as a result of which, initially the case which was registered under section 307, was altered to section 302 of the IPC.

4. After investigation was over, a charge-sheet was submitted in the committal Court, who committed the case to the Court of Session and from where it was received by the trial Court for trial.

5. The learned trial Judge, on the basis of allegations made against the appellant, framed the charge under section 302 of the IPC against appellant. Needless to say that the appellant has denied the charge and requested for trial fresh.

6. In order to bring home the charges, the prosecution examined as many as 24 witnesses (PW1 to PW24) and also proved the documents [Ex.P-1 to P-28(B)]. The defence of the appellant is of maladroit implication and the same defence he set forth in his statement recorded under section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code, however, he did not examine any witness in support of his defence.

7. The learned trial Judge, on the basis of evidence adduced on record, came to the conclusion that the charge under section 302 of the IPC has been proved against the appellant and eventually, convicted him under section 302 of the IPC by sentencing him to suffer life imprisonment and fine of Rs.5,000/-, with default stipulation.

8. In this manner, this appeal has been fi