MOHD. AMIR Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal challenges the judgment and order dtd. 22/9/2018 passed by Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Jhansi, in Sessions Trial No.240 of 2016 (State Vs. Mohd. Amir) in connection with Case Crime No.586 of 2015, Police Station Sipri Bazar, District Jhansi convicting the appellant under Sec. 302 IPC for life imprisonment along with fine of Rs.5,00,000.00, under Sec. 354 IPC for 3 years rigorous imprisonment along fine of Rs.50,000.00 and under Sec. 452 IPC for 3 yars rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs.50,000.00 and all the sentences shall run concurrently.

(2.) According to F.I.R., the applicant's daughter Km. Vinita Bajpai @ Doli, age - 24 years, used to live in Old Charliganj, Police Station - Sipri Bazar, Jhansi, DistrictJhansi for the care of the applicant's late brother and bhabhi (brother's wife)'s son Abhilash Tiwari and daughter Km. Rinki, who is mentally challenged. The occurrence took place on 18/12/15 at around 11:30 a.m. Km. Vinita, daughter of the applicant, was alone at her Jhansi located residence. Taking advantage of the opportunity, Mohd. Amir s/o Mohd. Anees, resident of Sarai Mohalla, Police Station - Kotwali, Jhansi entered the room of the applicant's daughter and tried to commit rape on the applicant's daughter, against which act the applicant's daughter protested, and raised alarm; so fearing to be get apprehended, the said Mohammad Amir poured kerosene, kept in the house, on the applicant's daughter and set her on fire with the intention of killing her. While executing the said occurrence, Mohammad Amir also came into flames. Hearing the commotion, Vivek Tiwari, the grandson of the applicant, and many other people reached the spot, and took Km. Vinita to the Medical College, Jhansi. As her condition was critical, she, not being allowed to be admitted, was asked to be taken to Gwalior instead. The daughter of the informant was admitted to Ayushman Hospital, Gwalior and she was in moribund state.

(3.) On being summoned, the accused pleaded not guilty and wanted to be tried, hence, the trial started and the prosecution examined 10 witnesses who are as follows: