JUDGMENT :

Arindam Lodh, J.

1. PRELIMINARY:-

1.1. The convict, Parimal Das has preferred the instant appeal questioning the legality and propriety of the judgment and order dated 31.03.2018, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, West Tripura, Agartala, in case No. S.T. (T-1) 120 of 2012, whereby and whereunder the appellant has been convicted under Section 302 of IPC and thereby sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- with default stipulation.

2. THE RELEVANT FACTS AND BACKGROUND:-

2.1. The prosecution case, as has been unfurled, is that on 19.03.2008, one Amulya Barman, appearing at Melaghar police station, submitted a written complaint stating, inter alia, that about 15 years back, his sister Ratna Barman(Das) was given marriage with Parimal Das and after their marriage two children were born out of their wedlock. After a few years Parimal Das developed an illicit relation with one of his neighbour, namely Laxmi Chakraborty who used to torture his sister in presence of Parimal Das and, on 18.03.2008, at about 11 p.m. said Parimal Das poured kerosene oil on the body of Ratna Barman (Das) whereby she was set ablazed.

2.2. Upon receipt of the aforesaid written ejahar, the Officer-In-Charge of Melaghar Police Station registered Melaghar P.S. Case No. 22/2008 under Section 302/109 of IPC against the accused persons, namely, Parimal Das and Laxmi Chakraborty. Thereafter, the case was endorsed to Shri Sanjoy Laskar, Sub-Inspector of Police for investigation.

2.3. During investigation, the investigating officer visited the scene of crime, prepared the hand sketch map, seized some articles from the place of occurrence in presence of the witnesses and recorded statements of the available witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. He also arrested the accused persons and forwarded them before the court. However, the investigating officer, Sri Sanjoy Laskar handed over the case to the O/C Melaghar P.S. as, in the meanwhile, he was transferred. Thereafter, S.I. Milan Datta took up the investigation of the case on 29.03.2008. He collected the dying declaration of the deceased from Melaghar Hospital, fire service report and also collected the post-mortem report. After completion of investigation, 1.0 submitted the charge-sheet with regard to the alleged commission of offence under Sections 302/109 against Smt. Laxmi Chakraborty and under Section 302 of IPC against Parimal Das, the appellant herein.

2.4. The case was committed to the Court of learned Sessions Judge. Having received the records of the case, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge framed charge against the Parimal Das under Section 302 of IPC. However, vide order dated 18.11.2009, Smt. Laxmi Chakraborty, the co-accused, who was charge-sheeted under Sections 302/109 of IPC was discharged.

2.5. During trial, the prosecution examined as many as 22 witnesses to substantiate the charge. After recording of evidence, the accused-appellant was examined under-Section 313 of Cr.P.C., to which he denied all the incriminating materials as surfaced from the prosecution evidence. He denied the evidence as false and reiterated that he has been falsely implicated in connection with this case.

2.6. The learned trial court took up the following points for discussions and decision:

(i) Whether the accused person had intentionally set fire by pouring Kerosene oil to his wife Ratna Barman on 18.03.2008 at about 11 pm and consequently Ratna Barman died at GBP Hospital, Agartala on 19.03.2008 at about 8.30 am due to the severe burn injury?

(ii) Whether the accused person had intentionally committed murder setting fire by pouring Kerosene oil?

2.7. After hearing the arguments of both sides, learned trial court held the appellant guilty of committing offence and convicted and sentenced him as afore-stated.

2.8. Hence this appeal.

3. SUBMISSION OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT:-

3.1. Criticizing the findings returned by the learned trial judge, Mr. S. Kar Bhowmik, l