VALARMATHI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the sole accused in Sessions Case No.15 of 2011, on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kancheepuram at Chengalpattu. She stood charged for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. By judgement dated 14.12.2012, the trial Court convicted her under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced her to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six weeks. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant is before this Court with this appeal.

(2.) The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:

(3.) Based on the above materials, the trial Court framed a charge under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Since the accused denied the same, to prove the case, on the side of the prosecution as many as 17 witnesses were examined, 13 documents and 4 materials objects were marked. Out of the said witnesses, P.Ws.1 and 2 are the neighbours, who have stated about the fact that on hearing the alarm, they rushed to the place of occurrence and they found the deceased sitting with burn injuries near the bathroom. When they enquired, he told them that his wife poured kerosene and set fire in a quarrel between them. P.W.3 is the daughter of the accused. She is a child, aged about 13 years. She has spoken about the quarrel between the accused and the deceased. She has further stated that when the quarrel was in progress, she left for her aunt's house. Thus, she was not an eye witness to the occurrence. P.W.4 is yet another child of the deceased. She has turned hostile. P.W.5 has also turned hostile. P.W.6 is a neighbour, who has also spoken about the fact that the deceased was sitting with burn injuries and he told that his wife set fire. P.W.7 is the then Judicial Magistrate No.II, Chengalpattu, who has stated that he recorded the statement of witnesses under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973. P.W.8 is yet another neighbour, who has again stated that the deceased told that his wife set fire to him. P.W.9 has spoken about the preparation of the observation mahazar and rough sketch and recovery of material objects from the place of occurrence. P.Ws.10 and 11 have turned hostile and they have not stated anything incriminating against the accused. P.W.12 has spoken about the statement made by the deceased when he was brought to him for treatment at 8.00 p.m. on 2.1.2010 and he has also spoken about the injuries found on the deceased. P.W.13 is the learned Magistrate, who has spoken about the judicial dying declaration recorded by him. P.W.16 is the Sub-Inspector of Police, who recorded Ex.P9-the statement of the deceased and registered the case. P.W.17 has spoken about the investigation done and the report filed.