GANPAT MAHADEO MANE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The sole appellant herein was convicted by the trial court under S. 302, IPC. and sentenced to imprisonment for life for causing the death of his wife. The appeal preferred by him was dismissed by the High Court. Hence the present appeal.

(2.) The prosecution case is that the appellant along with his wife Smt. Shobha, the deceased in the case, was living in a room of Block No. 1 of Police Line at the Police Headquarters, Solapur. There were no other members of his family living with them. There used to be quarrels between the husband and the wife and the deceased complained about the same to her mother Smt. Draupadi, P.W. 2. The accused used to give lift to a lady constable on his motor cycle and the deceased got suspicious about his relationship with the said lady constable. As the deceased underwent an operation and was recovering, she stayed with her parents for a period of two months. About two days prior to the incident, the deceased was taken back by the accused to his house. On 30-5-79 at about 8-15 a.m. the accused is alleged to have poured kerosene oil on the deceased and set her on fire. The deceased sustained serious burn injuries. The accused went to the M. T. Section and managed to get a jeep and carried her to the hospital and got her admitted. P.W.6, the Doctor on duty prepared the case papers and the deceased told P.W. 6, that her husband' poured kerosene oil on her and set fire. P.W. 2, the mother of the deceased, coming to know about the incident also came to the hospital. In the meanwhile the ward boy from the hospital gave information to the police. P.W. 5, Head Constable Inayat Hussain received the message and made an entry in the diary. P.W. 3, a Police Constable also went to the hospital and he recorded the statement of the deceased wherein she stated that her husband was responsible for causing burns to her. P.W. 7 Head Constable Kasabe thereafter gave a requisition to the Taluka Executive Magistrate to record the dying declaration and he also registered the crime under S. 307, IPC P.W. 4, the Executive Magistrate came to the hospital and recorded another dying declaration. The Doctor certified that she was conscious and in fit condition to make a statement. P.W. 11, S.I. took over the investigation and seized the incriminating articles. The deceased, however, died on the same night. He held the inquest over the dead body on 31-5-79. P.W. 12 Dr. Golli held the autopsy over the dead body and he found 97% burns. He opined that the injuries were ante-mortem and that death was due to extensive burns. P.W. 14 the Circle Inspector took over the investigation and filed the charge-sheet. The prosecution examined several witnesses and mainly relied on the dying declarations recorded by the Doctor, the Police and the Executive Magistrate. The accused when examined under S. 313, Cr. P.C. denied the offence and also added that he was in the M.T. Section when the Supervisor informed him that something unusual has happened in his house. Then he went to his house and found that his wife had actually caught fire and he extinguished the fire and came back to the M.T. Section, took a jeep and carried the injured to the hospital. Both the Courts below mainly relied on the dying declarations and convicted the accused.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the deceased who suffered 97% burns would not have made so many dying declarations and at any rate the dying declarations are result of tutoring.