STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. NATARAJU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed by the State against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 23.1.2008, passed by the Fast Track Court -III, Tumkur, in SC. No. 118/2006. The accused was tried for the offences punishable under Section 498A and 302 of IPC.

(2.) CASE of the prosecution in brief is that the accused is the husband of the deceased; their marriage was performed on 22.5.2002; they were living as tenants during the relevant time in the house of PW.4; the accused instead of doing any work, was complaining the deceased unnecessarily; he was addicted to bad habits; he used to torture his wife by pressurizing her to provide money to him for consumption of liquor; on 25.2.2006, the accused in usual manner started harassing the deceased to give money for consumption of liquor; since the money was not provided by the deceased, the accused with an intention to commit murder of his wife, poured kerosene on her and set her ablaze in the matrimonial house; immediately thereafter, the victim was admitted to General Hospital, Tumkur; however the victim could not recover from burn injuries and consequently, she expired due to burn injuries on 24.4.2006.

(3.) PW .1 is the owner of the house of the accused and the deceased. He was supposed to be eye witness, but he has turned hostile; PW.2 is the driver of autorikshaw, who shifted the injured to the hospital along with PW.1. But he has turned hostile; PW.3 is the father of the deceased; PW.4 is the mother of the deceased. PW.3 has deposed about the ill -treatment by the accused against the deceased. Same is the evidence of PW.4. In addition to the same, PW.4 has deposed that she was present at the time of recording of dying declaration of the deceased -Ex.P6; PW.5 is the brother of the deceased. His evidence is also relating to ill -treatment by the accused against the accused; PW.6 is the neighbour of the matrimonial house of accused and deceased and he turned hostile; PWs.7 and 8 are the mahazar witnesses for inquestpanchanama -Ex.P7; PW.8 is the Engineer who drew sketch as per Ex.P8; PW.10 is the Police Constable who carried certain articles to Forensic Science Laboratory for examination; PW.11 is the Taluka Executive Magistrate who held inquest proceedings and inquest report is at Ex.P7; PW.12 is the doctor who conducted postmortem examination over the dead body of the deceased. The postmortem report is at Ex.P9; PW.13 is the Secretary of the Gram Panchayat who issued extracts of the house, wherein the deceased and accused were living as per Ex.P10; PWs.14 and 15 are the neighbours, who have turned hostile; PW.16 is the P.S.I, who registered Crime No. 30/2006 on 3.3.2006 on the basis of Ex.P6; PW.17 is the doctor who treated the deceased on 25.2.2006. The Accident Register maintained by the doctor in the hospital is at Ex.P14; PW.18 is the P.S.I. who recorded the dying declaration -Ex.P6 and investigated the crime in part; PW.19 is the Investigating Officer who completed the investigation and laid charge sheet; PW.20 is the doctor who is stated to be present at the time of recording Ex.P6 in the hospital on 3.3.2006 by PW.18.