The

accused

No.1

/

appellant

in

Criminal

Appeal

No.1947/2017 is the husband of the deceased, accused No.2 /

appellant in Criminal Appeal No.621/2018 is the brother-in-law

of the deceased and brother of accused No.1 who is a physically

challenged person and cannot walk, and accused No.3 is the wife

of accused No.2, against whom split up chargesheet was filed.

2.

Accused Nos.1 and 2 filed the present criminal

appeals against the impugned judgment of conviction dated

20.09.2017 and order of sentence dated 21.09.2017 passed in

S.C.No.123/2011 on the file of the I Additional District and

Sessions Judge, Ramanagara, convicting the accused Nos.1 and

2 for the offence punishable under section 302 read with section

34 of IPC and sentencing them to undergo life imprisonment and

pay fine of `10,000/- each, in default, to further undergo simple

imprisonment for six months.

3.

It is the case of the prosecution that, based on the

statement of the victim Smt.Savitha dated 24.08.2010 at about

5

12.30 p.m., the jurisdictional police treated the victim statement

as complaint and registered Crime No.241/2010 under the

provisions of section 498A, 307 read with section 34 of IPC,

further on 07.10.2010 at about 09.00 a.m., PW.2 3 father of the

deceased gave a statement before the jurisdictional police that

his daughter, who was burnt and hospitalized, has died on

06.10.2010 at about 7.30 p.m. Hence, section 307 IPC was

changed to section 302 IPC.

4.

It is the case of the prosecution that the accused

No.1 married Savitha and by telling that she is barren and not

having any children, harassing her both physically and mentally.

On 22.08.2010 at about 8.00 p.m., the accused Nos.1 to 3

abused the deceased for not having any children, when deceased

asked why they are scolding them, accused No.1 3 husband

pulled her hair and assaulted her with hands. Accused Nos.2

and 3 abused her in filthy language and accused No.1 said that

she has to be killed and went away from the house. Thereafter,

accused Nos.2 and 3 poured kerosene on her and accused No.2

lit the fire. On hearing the screams of deceased Savitha,

6

neighbours rushed to the spot and extinguished the fire. Her

mother-in-law

admitted

the

deceased

to

Ramanagara

Government Hospital for treatment. Thereafter, on reference,

she was sent to Victoria Hospital, Bengaluru. Her statement was

recorded on 24.08.2010 at 12.30 p.m. She was discharged from

the hospital on 19.09.2010, subsequently, she died on

06.10.2010 at about 7.30 p.m. Thereafter, her father PW.2 has

lodged one more complaint Ex.P2 on 07.10.2010 at about 09.00

a.m., and based on the said complaint, the provision of section

307 of IPC was converted into section 302 of IPC by the

jurisdictional police. After investigation, the jurisdictional police

filed the chargesheet under the provisions of sections 498A and

302 read with section 34 of IPC.

5.

After the matter was committed to the learned

Sessions Judge, learned Sessions Judge secured the presence of

the accused persons and framed common charges against the

accused Nos.1 to 3 under the provisions of sections 498A, 302

read with sections 34 of IPC and read over and explained to the

7

accused persons in the language known to them. Accused

pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6.

In order to prove the case of the prosecution, the

prosecution examined, in all, 15 witnesses as P.W.1 to P.W.15,

produced material documents as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.12 and material

objects M.O.1 and M.O.2. After completion of the evidence of

prosecution witnesses, the statements of the accused persons,

as contemplated under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., were recorded.

The accused persons denied the incriminating evidence adduced

by the prosecution witnesses, but not adduced any defence

evidence.

7.

Based on the aforesaid pleadings, learned Sessions

Judge framed two points for consideration, which read as

under:-

(1)

Whether the prosecution proves beyond

reasonable doubt that, the accused No.1 was living

with S