MURALI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant, a prisoner in custody, has preferred this appeal through prison authorities to assail the verdict of guilty, conviction and sentence imposed on him under Sections 498A and 304B I.P.C. He was sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of three years under Section 498A and to undergo R.I. for a period of 10 years under Section 304B I.P.C. there was a further direction to pay a compensation of Rs. 50,000/- which was to be released to his only daughter under Section 357(3) Cr.P.C. and in default to undergo R.I. for a further period of three years. The substantive sentences of imprisonment were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) Initially the appellant faced indictment for the offences under Sections 489A and 302 I.P.C. After the commencement of the trial, the learned Sessions Judge altered the charge and included the charge under Section 304B I.P.C. After giving all reasonable opportunity to the accused consequent to the amendment of charge by recalling the witnesses etc., the trial proceeded. Before the court below as also before this Court the accused did not engage a counsel of his own and counsel were appointed on State Brief to assist the appellant. The appellant appears to be fortunate in that he has received good legal assistance. The learned Sessions Judge in the judgment has mentioned that exemplary assistance was rendered to the appellant by counsel Miss. Merline George. I must pay similar compliments to Sri. V. Chithambaresh, a fairly senior counsel, who, at the request of the court, had rendered assistance to the appellant. On behalf of the State also the learned Public Prosecutor Sri. C.P. Saji has rendered great assistance to the Court.

(3.) The crux of the allegations against the appellant is that he was guilty of matrimonial cruelty against the deceased, his wife. The marriage between the two took place on 12.2.1995. One girl child was born in such wedlock. It is the case of the prosecution that the appellant was guilty of continuous and incessant cruelty against his wife. He was allegedly suspicious of his wife. He allegedly harassed his wife by frequent demands for amounts, which the prosecution describes to be demands for dowry. The unfortunate wife met her death on the night of 8.6.1998. Furidan, an insectiside/poison had found its way to the stomach of the deceased and that was identified to be the killer.