ANUP Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the sole accused in Sessions Case No.302 of 2011, on the file of the Mahalir Sessions Court, Chennai. He stood charged for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. By judgement dated 11.10.2012, the trial Court convicted him under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. 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 lone charge against the accused under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The accused denied the same. In order to prove the case, on the side of the prosecution as many as 17 witnesses were examined, 18 documents and 15 materials objects were marked. Out of the said witnesses, P.Ws.2, 3 and 4, who are the neighbours of the deceased, have turned hostile and they have not supported the case of the prosecution in any manner. P.Ws.1 and 7 are also the neighbours of the deceased, who have stated that on hearing the alarm raised by the deceased, they reached the house of the deceased and found the deceased in flames, in front of her house, crying for help. They further stated that they extinguished the fire, by pouring water on her and then took her to the hospital. P.W.1 has further stated that at the earliest point of time, the deceased told him that the accused poured kerosene and set fire. P.W.7 has not stated anything so. P.Ws.5 and 6 are the mother and brother respectively of the deceased. According to them, they heard about the occurrence and rushed to the hospital. In the hospital, when they enquired the deceased, the deceased told them that the accused poured kerosene and set fire to her. They have also stated about the motive for the occurrence. P.W.8 has also turned hostile and he has not supported the case of the prosecution in any manner. He has spoken about the arrest of the accused. P.Ws.10 and 11 have not stated anything incriminating, as they have spoken only about the hear say information. P.W.12 has spoken to the fact that he carried the dead body to the hospital for post-mortem. P.W.13 has spoken about the admission of the deceased at the Government Royapettah Hospital at Chennai and the statement made by her to him. P.W.14 has stated about the treatment given to the deceased. She has further stated that when the learned Magistrate came to the hospital, she certified to the Magistrate about the mental fitness of the deceased. P.W.15 has spoken about the post-mortem conducted and the final opinion regarding the cause of death. P.W.17 has spoken about the judicial dying declaration recorded by him and P.W.16 has spoken about the investigation done and the final report filed.