C V GOVINDAPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is challenging the judgment of the High Court of Karnataka convicting him for offences under Sections 302, 304 and 498-A, IPC and sentencing him to imprisonment for life for the offence under Section 302, IPC and rigorous imprisonment for two years and payment of fine of Rs. 1000/- for the offence under Section 498-A, IPC with a direction that the substantive sentences of imprisonment were to run concurrently. The High Court reversed the judgment of the Sessions Judge at Chitradurga acquitting the appellant and his mother Thimmakka. The appeal by the State against the appellant's mother before the High Court was dismissed and in fact the acquittal of the appellant's mother by the Sessions' Court was not seriously challenged in the High Court.

(2.) The appellant married Yashodhamma in September, 1976. Even before the marriage there was demand for dowry of jewels and Rs. 50,000/- in cash and only a part thereof was paid. The remaining part was being paid in instalments. The appellant was repeatedly demanding payment of dowry in cash and also jewels. He was treating his wife with cruelty as evident from letters written by her to her relations. Though there were two children, the appellant did not stop the ill-treatment of his wife. On 26-1-1984 there was a quarrel between husband and wife which was noticed by the neighbours. In the evening between 5 and 5.30 P.M. the appellant's wife came running out of the house with flames on her clothes and dashed against the scooter of the appellant kept in front of the house. She fell down and rolled on the ground. The appellant came out of the house and restored the scooter to its stand but did not take steps to save his wife and went away after merely touching her. The neighbours who were present made all attempts to put out the flames by wrapping her in a rug and removing the burning clothes from her body. An auto rikshaw was brought by one of them and she was taken to the Government hospital.

(3.) Even before that the appellant's wife had told the neighbours that her husband had poured kerosene oil on her and set fire. While going in auto-rikshaw she was repeatedly saying that her husband had burnt her. She was admitted in the hospital by PW 12 to whom the appellant's wife had two days before the incident given a sum of Rs. 100/- and addresses of her brothers with a request to inform them in the event of anything untoward happening to her. PW-12 sent telegrams to the relatives of the appellant's wife. The appellant went to the hospital later in the night and saw his wife in the ward. He scolded PW 12 Krishnaveni for staying in the hospital by the side of his wife and told her that whatever had happened and his wife should be properly advised.