CHANDRASHEKAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the accused against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 18.03.2010 passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Bellary, in Sessions Case No.6 of 2009 wherein the accused is convicted and sentenced for the of fence punishable under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the accused and Gouri-deceased are husband and wife. They were married about 15 years back. Since the time of marriage, the accused is said to have causing cruelty to Gouri physically and mentally to extract money from her to drink alcohol. The accused used to threaten to kill her(Gouri), if, she fails to give money. On 02.10.2008 at about 9.30 p.m., the accused picked up quarrel with Gouri and with an intention to kill her, poured kerosene on her and lit fire. She sustained severe burn injuries. She was taken to VIMS Hospital, Bellary. Initially, Crime No.143 of 2008 for the of fences punishable under Sections 498-A and 307 of Indian Penal Code was registered against the accused. Subsequently, injured Gouri succumbed to the burn injuries on 15.10.2008. Hence, an offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC was leveled against the accused. The accused was arrested and confined to judicial custody. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed against the accused for the of fences punishable under Sections 498-A and 302 of IPC. Learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offences alleged and committed the case to the Sessions Court for trial. Learned Sessions Judge after holding trial found the accused guilty of the of fences punishable under Sections 498-A and accordingly sentenced the accused to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. The Sessions Court acquitted the accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC.

(3.) Being aggrieved by the said judgment of conviction and sentence, the accused has preferred this appeal on the following grounds: The impugned judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Sessions Court is not tenable both in the eye of law and on the merits of the case. The Sessions Court failed to consider the fact that there was no direct evidence against the accused. The prosecution has miserably failed to prove the charge of harassment and cruelty on the part of the accused. Except the interested witnesses, no independent witness supported the case of the prosecution. The impugned judgment of conviction and sentence is not sustainable in law, as the same is against the evidence on record. Therefore, learned counsel for the appellant prayed for allowing the appeal by setting aside by impugned judgment of conviction and sentence and to acquit him of the of fences charged against him .