B R GOUTAM Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated 24. 12. 1997 passed by the II Additional Sessions Judge, Dharwad; convicting a1 for the offence under Section 302 IPC and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life and acquitted A2 of the said offence. Both A1 and A2 were charged and tried (or the offence punishable under Section 302 read with 34 IPC.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution is that the deceased Sunita was married to one Manohar Kongi 5 or 6 years prior to the incident which occurred in the early morning of 25. 4. 1995. She was doing tailoring profession; she left her husband at Navalgund in Dharwad district and came down to Dharward city with her 3 years old child vinay and settled at Sriramnagar extension in Dharwad city since about 2-1/2 years prior to the death of her death. It is the case of the prosecution that she developed intimacy with the first accused -appellant goutham who was aged 28 to 30 years and the deceased was aged 25 years. This relationship continued for about 8 to 9 months. This lady was brought to the Civil hospital, Dharwad at about 12 noon on 25. 4,1995 by her sister P. W. 9 Sujatha with 70% burn injuries on her body. P. W. 8 Dr. Sheshagiri who was a Casualty medical Officer, examined her and recorded the history of the incident and sent intimation to the jurisdictional police. PW-10 - the Circle inspector of Police, visited the Civil hospital and requested the duty doctor PW. 8 for recording the statement of the injured who recorded the statement with the assistance of P. C. as in Ex. P6. Thereafter, the Circle Inspector PW. 10 recorded her statement as in Ex. P7 on the basis of which he registered a criminal case in Crime No. 96 of 1995 under Section 307 IPC read with 34 IPC against A1 and A2. He then sent a requisition to the Taluka Executive Magistrate PW. 3 bhimsenrao to record the statement of Smt. Sunita who was admitted to the Civil hospital with the history of bum injuries. PW. 3 visited the hospital at 2 p. m. and recorded the statement of the injured Sunita in a proforma brought by him which is marked as Ex,p3. She died on the next day as a result of shock on account of burn injuries. An altered FIR was issued to the Court and further investigation was completed by P. W. 11 after preparing a spot panchanama during which period they seized MOs. 1 to 8. The dead body was subjected to p. M. examination in the hands of PW. 2 Dr. Rajashekar Gurupadayya puranik and another. The accused were arrested subsequently. During the course of investigation, the I. O. recorded the statement of PW. 9 Sujatha - the younger sister of the deceased and after completing all the formalities of investigation, laid a charge sheet against both the accused persons. The charge against both the accused was that the accused with the common intention of committing murder and in execution of common intention. A1 poured kerosene on the deceased Sunita as she objected the 1st accused who visited her house in the company of A2 under the influence of alcohol at that odd time of 1 a. m. in the night and A1 poured kerosene on her when A2 caught hold of her hands and A1 set fire to her and ran away from the place. Both the accused pleaded not guilty to the charge framed against them and therefore, the prosecution was called upon to prove the charge against them. In proof of the said charge, the prosecution relied upon the ocular evidence of 11 witnesses and documentary material Exs. P. 1 to P10 and M. Os. 1 to 8 and closed its case.

(3.) THE accused who were examined under Section 313 Cr. P. G. ,denied the truth of the prosecution evidence and chose to file a statement in writing contending that on the date of incident at about 2 a. m. as usual, he went to see a friend who was residing by the side of the house of deceased Sunita; he over heard the cry from inside the house of Sunita, entered her house and found that she was actually in flames. He attempted to extinguish the fire, somehow he came out of the house and fell on the road and somebody took him to civil hospital Dharwad. His father who came to know of the same, wanted to take him to KMC hospital, Hubli, but he took him to German hospital, Dharwad, from there he visited Mirag hospital five times and he had undergone operation thrice. This was disclosed by him to the police when he was taking treatment in the civil hospital, dharwad. It is also in his statement that the police have concocted a false case against him on the basis of some people who were enmical towards him and taking advantage of presence at the time of incident.