ARUMUGAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I - JUDGMENT UNDER APPEAL The appellant is the sole accused in Sessions Case No. 230 of 1999 on the file of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.I, Tirunelveli District. He questions the correctness of the judgment dated 11.4.2002 rendered in the above stated sessions case, whereunder the appellant was convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A and 302 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years with a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 498A I.P.C. and imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 302 I.P.C. The appellant hereinafter is referred to as the accused. II - CHARGE

(2.) THE charge against the appellant is that at 10.00 a.m. on 11.2.1998, he demanded his wife Radha to get Rs. 50,000/- from her mother and threatened that he would live with her only if she brings money, or otherwise, he would kill her, which is punishable under Section 498-A I.P.C. and in the course of the same transaction, at 12.00 noon on 11.2.1998, with an intention to murder his wife, he poured kerosene on her body and set her on fire, causing her death, which is punishable under Section 302 I.P.C. III - CASE OF THE PROSECUTION

(3.) FOR the reasons aforementioned, we are unable to accept the contention of the learned counsel for the accused that it would not be safe to rely on the dying declaration of the deceased, Ex.P8. On the other hand, the dying declaration, Ex.P8, is clear and it satisfies the requirement of Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act.