RAMESH BABU DESAI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned A. P. P. for the respondent-State. Neither the appellant for his Advocate present. Bearing in mind the decision of the Apex Court in Bani Singh and others v. State of U. P. , reported in AIR 1994 SC 2439 me perused the entire the entire records including the judgment passed by the Court below with the assistance of the learned A. P. P.

(2.) THIS appeal arises from the judgment and order Sated 24-9-1992 passed in Sessions Case No. 121 of 1991 by the addl. Sessions Judge, Sangli. By the impugned judgment the appellant/accused has been held guilty of offence of murder of one Surayya, punishable under Section 382 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default to suffer imprisonment for six months.

(3.) THE accusations against the appellant were that on 16-3-1991, at about 9:00 p. m. , he had a quarrel with one surayya in her room in Diwate Chawl at Yashwantnagar, vita, for having arranged her bed on the floor, instead of the cot in the room. The quarrel lasted for few minutes and half-an-hour thereafter the neighbours gathered near the said room consequent to the shouts from Surayya for help. The door of the room was found closed and it was forcibly opened whereupon Surayya came out of the room in a condition where the clothes on her body were seen to have caught fire and as soon as she came out of the room, she collapsed on the ground. The fire on her body was then extinguished and she was taken to Primary Health Centre, Vita, where consequent to the advise of the Medical Officer at the Centre, she was taken to the Civil Hospital at Sangli, after being provided with first-aid at the Centre. In the hospital she succumbed to her burn injuries around 6:00 p. m. on17-3-1991, However, prior to that her dying declaration was recorded wherein she disclosed about the quarrel with the accused and the reason for the Quarrel as well as the fact that the accused had poured kerosene on her body and set her on fire. Consequent to recording of the dying declaration, crime was registered under no. 48/91. On conclusion of the investigation, the appellant was prosecuted for the offence punishable under Section 382 and after being tried was sought to be punished by the impugned judgment as stated above.