CHANNAMALLAPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the Judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the Court of Fast Track, Jamakhandi in Sessions Case No.77 of 2010 dated 28.02.2011.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant-accused and the learned Additional S.P.P. appearing for the respondent-State.

(3.) The genesis of the case of the prosecution in brief is that, about 15 to 16 years ago deceased got married with the accused. They were residing along with their children at Rabakavi. Subsequently, the accused addicted to bad vices and he used to drink arrack and assault his wife and thereby he used to give physical and mental torture. On 13.11.2009, the deceased had been to mason work and came back in the afternoon. Accused also came to the house by consuming the arrack and abused his wife in filthy language and also stated that she is having an illicit relationship with the person where she has gone to mason work and assaulted with hands. When he went out of the house, the deceased because of the physical and mental torture, poured the kerosene on her body and lit fire. By hearing the said cry of the deceased, accused rushed back along with neighbours, they doused the fire and shifted her to Banahatti Government Hospital for treatment. From there, she has been shifted to the District Hospital, Bijapur. When she was in the Banahatti Hospital, the statement of the injured was recorded as per Ex.P.7 and subsequently she was shifted to the District Hospital, Bijapur and there she succumbed to the burn injuries on 21.11.2009 at about 2.20 p.m. Thereafter, on the basis of the complaint Ex.P.7, a case has been registered in Crime No.146 of 2009. After investigating the charge sheet was filed. The learned J.M.F.C. Banahatti took the cognizance and committed the case to the Sessions Court. Sessions Court took the cognizance and transferred the case to the Fast Track Court, Jamakhandi. The learned Fast Track Judge after securing the presence of the accused and after hearing the learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the accused, charge was prepared and read over and explained to the accused, accused pleaded not guilty and he claimed to be tried and as such the trial was fixed.