VELAVAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the sole accused in Sessions Case No.222 of 2006, on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge(Fast Track Court No.III, Poonamallee). He stood charged for the offence under Sections 498-A and 302 of the Indian Penal Code. By judgement dated 16.11.2006, 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.25,000/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years. The trial Court acquitted him for the charge under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. 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 incriminating materials, the trial Court framed charges as detailed in the first paragraph of this judgement. The accused denied the same as false. In order to prove the case, on the side of the prosecution, as many as 9 witnesses were examined, 19 documents and 6 material objects were marked. Out of the said witnesses, P.W.1, the father of the deceased, has spoken about the strained relationship between the accused and the deceased. He has further stated that he was informed by the father-in-law of the deceased at 1.00 a.m. on 18.1.2005 that the deceased had been set on fire. He has further stated that when he enquired, on reaching her house, the deceased told him that it was the accused, who set fire to her. P.W.2, the Doctor, has stated that at 3.00 a.m., when the deceased was admitted, he was told that the deceased was set on fire by her husband. P.W.3 has spoken about the statement recorded by her under Section 164 Cr.P.C., from the witnesses. P.W.4 has stated about the treatment given at the Royapettah Government Hospital. According to him, on 18.1.2005, it was told that the deceased was set on fire by her husband. P.W.5, a neighbour has stated that when he rushed to the house of the deceased, on hearing the alarm raised and when he enquired, the deceased told him that the accused set fire to her. P.Ws.6 and 7 have stated about the observation mahazar prepared at the place of occurrence and the rough sketch and about the recovery of material objects. P.W.8 has spoken about the postmortem conducted. P.W.9 has spoken about the case registered by him, the statement recorded from the deceased under Ex.P.15 and the further investigation done by him.