HORI LAL YADAV Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 23.9.2011 passed by the Sessions Judge, JanjgirChampa in ST No.154/10 convicting the accused/appellant under Section 302 of IPC and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- with default stipulation.

(2.) As per prosecution case, on 1.7.2010 at about 2 pm the accused/appellant demanded money from his wife/deceased Kuntibai for purchasing liquor and when she refused to give him money saying "she does not have food in the house and yet you are demanding money for liquor", he having poured kerosene on her set her afire. At the relevant time, only the accused/appellant and the deceased were in the house as their two daughters had gone to the house of their maternal uncle. After seeing smoke emanating from the house of the deceased and hearing her cries, PW-12 Sohanlal, a villager, informed the daughters of the deceased, on which they along with their maternal uncle and aunt rushed to the house of the deceased. At that time the deceased was alive, on being asked as to how she got burnt, the deceased informed them that on account of her refusal to give money to the appellant for purchasing liquor, he poured kerosene on her body and set her ablaze. She was immediately taken to Government Hospital, Champa where she was medically examined by Dr. (Smt.) Anita Shrivastava (PW-5) vide Ex.P/7, according to which she had suffered 94% burn injuries. In the hospital her dying declaration was recorded by PW-11 TR Bhardwaj, Executive Magistrate, vide Ex.P/11, after obtaining certificate of the treating doctor as to consciousness of the patient to make statement. In the said dying declaration the deceased has categorically stated that it is her husband/appellant, who under the influence of liquor, set her on fire by pouring kerosene. She has further stated that on the date of incident she was alone in the house; her daughters had gone to the house of their maternal uncle at Balpur; her husband is a drunkard, he commits marpeet with her quite often after consuming liquor, she earns her livelihood by working as labour and thereby maintains her children. However, on the second day i.e. 2.7.2010 she succumbed to her burn injuries during treatment. Merg intimation Ex.P/17 was recorded on 2.7.2010 at the instance of Bhushan, Ward Boy. Thereafter, inquest (Ex.P/5) over the dead body was prepared and the body was sent for postmortem, which was conducted on 2.7.2010 by PW-6 Dr. KR Singh vide Ex.P/12 wherein he noticed 90% second degree burn and opined that the cause of death was asphyxia as a result of burning and its complications. Memorandum (Ex.P/14) of the accused/appellant was recorded, pursuant to which one plastic jerrycane and one match box were seized vide Ex.P/16. From the place of occurrence, one burnt piece of blouse, burnt piece of sari, one burnt jute bag, two pieces of burnt matchstick and another piece of burnt sari, were seized vide Ex.P/15. After investigation charge sheet was filed against the appellant under Section 302 of IPC and accordingly, charge was framed.

(3.) So as to hold the accused/appellant guilty, the prosecution examined as many as 15 witnesses. Statement of the accused was also recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. in which he denied the circumstances appearing against him in the prosecution case, pleaded innocence and false implication. In defence, he examined his mother Bhuribai Yadav.