KANCHANBHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is directed against the judgment and the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.210 of 2008 whereby the learned Sessions Judge has convicted the appellant accused for the offence under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced for life imprisonment with the fine of Rs.1,000/and further R.I. of 01 year for default in payment of fine.

(2.) The short facts of the case are that the complaint was filed at Ex.51 by the deceased Lalitaben during her life time with the police on 23.12.2006 stating that yesterday (22.12.2006) when she was at her residence with her husband, her fatherinlaw was also at the residence. At the evening at about 7 O clock when the accused told the deceased to go to Village Mirsapur at uncle s place, the deceased refused and thereafter there was quarrel and the accused had beaten the deceased and went away. Thereafter at about 9 O clock again there was quarrel between the accused and the deceased in connection with the aforesaid incident for the function of uncle and at that time the accused poured the kerosene which was brought by the fatherinlaw of the deceased for residential use and the accused set ablaze the deceased. The deceased started shouting, at that time the accused sprinkled water upon her and covered up with bedding in order to extinguish the fire. Thereafter, motherinlaw of the deceased called the mother of the deceased and the mother of the deceased was brought and on the next day they were taken to the hospital and the complaint was filed. In the complaint it was stated that she had no dispute or any harassment with motherinlaw or fatherinlaw.

(3.) The aforesaid complaint was investigated by the police and the chargesheet was filed against the accused. The case was committed to the learned Sessions Judge being Sessions Case No.210 of 2008. The prosecution in order to prove the guilt of the accused examined 17 witnesses and the details of whereof are recorded by the learned Sessions Judge at para4 of the impugned judgment. The prosecution also produced the documentary evidence of 23 documents, the details of which are mentioned by the learned Sessions Judge at para5 in the impugned judgment.