AFZALALLI KARIMULLA ANSARI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant - original accused has while filing this appeal has challenged the order of conviction recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Raigad-Alibag dated 10.5.1995 passed in Sessions Case No. 101 of 1990 and as per the said order the appellant - accused was held guilty for the offence under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and ordered to suffer R. I. for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default to appellant - accused to undergo further R. I. for six months.

(2.) MRS. Agarwal, the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant - accused during the hearing has took us through the evidence of the witnesses recorded during the trial as well as the documentary evidence, namely, the panchnama and the post mortem note of the deceased and the judgment under challenge.

(3.) THE evidence of p. w. 4 Vibhavari Vilas Jadhav shows that she was working as a staff nurse in Naval Hospital Karanja and she was on duty in hospital on 24.3.1990 between 3 p. m. to 10 p. m. It is found from her evidence that one woman staying in Block No. P-3 is shouting and smoke is coming from the said house situate in Navy Nagar. Accordingly, the witness has with Mandalekar - the labourer has sent the ambulance and the patient was brought in the said ambulance in a burnt condition. Dr. Mathew was attached to that hospital and accordingly she has called Dr. Mathew and in turn Dr. Mathew has treated the said patient. Even she was present at the time of treatment given to her and she has enquired from the patient about the incident and in reply thereto, the patient has informed her that her husband poured kerosene and set her on fire. THE witness has asked the patient that where is her husband, in reply thereto the patient has replied Bhag Gaya (ran away) and then the patient was referred to St. George Hospital at Mumbai. In cross-examination she has admitted that there is no policeman on duty in Naval Hospital and she had not informed the Naval Police. It is further found that the civil police had come and recorded her statement. She has not disclosed to anybody else about the statement given by the patient. However, she has stated that she has told the doctor who was on duly about what the patient has said. She has denied that she is deposing falsely as per the say of the police and she admitted that the lady patient has 95% of burns.