JAYAKUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant has approached this Court in appeal challenging his conviction and sentence for the offence punishable under Section 304(I) IPC, on a trial held by the Fast Track Court -IV, Tumkur.

(2.) THE facts reveal that Smt.Nagarathna (deceased) is the wife of appellant. Approximately 10 years prior to the incident, her marriage was performed. PW7 - Basavaraju and PW8 - Indramma are her parents. PW9 Raveesha is her brother. Through the wedlock, the appellant and deceased Nagarathna have a female child PW1 Sindhu. There was difference of opinion between the spouses in financial matters and they used to quarrel. The appellant was not paying salary for the maintenance of family. It is in the aforesaid circumstances, on 18.08.2008 at about 4.30 p.m. when Nagarathna was in her house, the appellant herein (accused) quarreled with his wife and when she insisted him to provide money for maintenance of the family, it is alleged by the prosecution that the appellant doused kerosene and set fire to her, thereby she sustained severe burns. She was taken to the hospital by the appellant and the neighbors and in the course of treatment, she succumbed to the burns on 22.08.2008. While she was in the hospital for treatment, on 19.08.2008 at about 1.20 p.m., PW24 Patharaju, the Taluka Executive Magistrate on the request of police, recorded her dying declaration (Ex.P13) and on the basis of said dying declaration, Cr.No.104/2008 came to be registered for the offence under Sections 498A and 307 IPC. The FIR was sent to the Magistrate and the spot mahazar (Ex.P7) was held in the presence of attesting witness. As Nagarathna succumbed to the burns on 22.08.2008, inquest was held on her body and the body was subjected to postmortem examination. The police recorded the statement of witnesses, the sketch of scene of occurrence and photographs were taken. The house khata extract were collected. After arrest of the accused, he was examined by the doctor and the injury certificate (Ex.P16) was secured. The seized articles were sent to the opinion of expert and report (Ex.P34) was secured. On completion of the investigation, chargesheet was laid against the appellant for the charge under Section 498A and 302 IPC.

(3.) I have heard the learned Counsel for appellant and also learned High Court Government Pleader.