KAVERI Vs. STATE OF TAMILNADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE conviction imposed upon the appellant under Section 302, IPC for having caused the murder of his wife by pouring kerosene and setting fire to her body is being challenged in this appeal filed by him.

(2.) THE short facts leading to the filing of the appeal are as follows: (a) THE deceased Sakunthala was given in marriage to the accused/appellant 8 years back. Out of their wedlock, two male children and one female child were born to them. Though the accused used to work in a silver factory, he would not be regular for work due to his bad activities. He indulged in consuming arrack and spending time in playing cards with others. THEre used to be frequent quarrel between the accused and the deceased, the accused invariably demanding money from the deceased in order to meet the expenditure towards his bad habits. Despite the efforts of the deceased to correct him, the accused continued to carry on with his bad activities and beat the deceased whenever he was not paid the money demanded by him. THE matter was reported several times to the parents of the deceased as well as to P. W. 4, perumal, who is the brother of the deceased. But, both of them used to pacify the deceased and asked her to go back to the matrimonial home. (b) THE fateful occurrence took place on 31. 1. 2000 at about 4. 30 p. m. THE accused had a quarrel with the deceased since she did not pay the amount which was demanded by him for drinking. When the deceased refused to pay the amount, the accused abused her stating that he would not live with her any more and that she should commit suicide by taking poison, or else, he would kill her. When the wordy quarrel was going on, the accused suddenly took a can of kerosene, poured the kerosene over the body of the deceased, took out a match stick from the match box and threw the burning match stick on the body of the deceased, thereby setting the deceased on fire. THE deceased, having been engulfed in the fire, came out of the house and the neighbours who gathered there put out the fire by pouring water on her. THE information as to this occurrence reached P. W. 4, P. W. 5, who is the mother of the deceased and the husband of P. W. 5, viz. , the father of the deceased. All of them came and saw the deceased with burn injuries. When they enquired as to what happened, the deceased told them that since she refused to pay her husband the amount demanded by him for drinking purpose, he poured kerosene and set fire on her. Since the injuries found all over the body of the deceased were serious, they engaged an auto and took her to a hospital. (c) P. W. 8, the doctor, admitted her and gave her treatment. Immediately thereafter, he sent Ex. P. 5, intimation to the police regarding the admission of the deceased in the hospital with burn injuries. He also issued Ex. P. 6, accident register in which it was stated that the deceased told him that she was set on fire by her husband. P. W. 8, doctor, sent requisition to the Judicial Magistrate requesting him to record the statement of the deceased as her condition was serious. Accordingly, P. W. 6, Judicial magistrate, went to the hospital and after satisfying himself as to the consciousness of the deceased with the help of P. W. 7, Dr. Varadharaju, recorded her dying declaration, Ex. P. 2. Exs. P. 3 and P. 4 are the endorsements made by p. W. 7. (d) P. W. 13, the Sub-Inspector of Police, on receipt of the intimation from P. W. 8, doctor, came to the hospital in the early morning on 1. 2. 2000 at 2 a. m. , recorded his statement and registered it as a complaint for an offence punishable under Section 307, IPC against the accused. Ex. P. 13 is the complaint. After registering the case, the FIR was sent to the Court as well as the superior officers. P. W. 14, the Inspector of Police, took up further investigation of the case, went to the spot and prepared the Ex. P. 10, observation mahazar and Ex. P. 16, rough sketch. He also recovered the burnt materials, including the kerosene can. THEn he continued the investigation. (e) In the meantime, the accused surrendered before p. W. 11, the Village Administrative Officer and gave a statement confessing that he poured kerosene and caused burn injuries on the body of the deceased. That statement is Ex. P. 12. THEreafter, he was produced before P. W. 14, who in turn, arrested him and sent him for judicial custody. (f) P. W. 7, the doctor, continued to give treatment to the deceased, but however, she died on 6. 2. 2000 and the death intimation was sent to the police. P. W. 13, the Sub-Inspector of Police, on receipt of the death intimation, altered the F. I. R. into one punishable under Section 302, IPC, prepared express report and sent the same to the Court as well as his superior office. P. W. 14, the Inspector of Police took up further investigation. He came to the hospital and conducted inquest. THE inquest report is Ex. P. 17. THE material objects were sent for chemical analysis through the Court. After completing the investigation, he filed a charge sheet against the accused for the offence under Section 302 IPC. (g) During the course of trial, on the side of the prosecution, P. Ws. 1 to 14 were examined, Exs. P. 1 to P. 17 were filed and M. Os. 1 and 2 were marked. (h) On the side of the defence, D. W. 1, the son of the accused was examined. (i) THE accused, while being questioned under Section 313, Cr. P. C. with reference to the incriminating materials, denied his complicity in the crime. (j) THE trial court, after having considered the evidence placed on record, concluded that the prosecution has established its case beyond all reasonable doubt, convicted the accused for the offence under section 302 IPC and the said judgment is the subject matter of the appeal before this Court.

(3.) ACCORDING to the prosecution, the deceased, in order to take care of her children, had to undertake some coolie work and earn her livelihood. The husband of the deceased never used to go for work and earn money for the family. On the other hand, in order to spend money towards his consumption of arrack and also for playing cards, he used to frequently demand money from the deceased. On the fateful day, when the money demanded was not paid, according to the prosecution, the accused poured kerosene and set fire to her. On receipt of the information, P. W. 4, the brother of the deceased, accompanied by P. W. 5, the mother of the deceased went and asked the deceased as to how she sustained burn injuries. She had given clear details as to what happened. Immediately, P. W. 4 took her to the hospital in the auto and admitted her. The fact that P. W. 4 admitted the deceased in the hospital has been clearly established by the evidence of the doctor, P. W. 8 and Ex. P. 5. Ex. P. 6 is the accident register. Both in Exs. P. 5 and P. 6, P. W. 8 would mention that the deceased was brought to the hospital by P. W. 4, Perumal, the brother of the deceased. P. W. 4 would state that he was accompanied to the hospital by P. W. 5, the mother of the deceased. P. W. 10, the auto driver would also state that the deceased was brought in his auto from her house to the hospital by P. W. 4, perumal as well as another old lady, who is P. W. 5, the mother of the deceased. When the aspect of the deceased being accompanied by P. W. 4 to the hospital has been established, there is no reason to reject the evidence of P. W. 4 who speaks about the oral dying declaration.