SHAIK MAHABOOB BASHA Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment rendered by the learned Sessions Judge, Cuddapah in S.C.No. 61 of 1998, dated 17-02-1999 convicting A-l to undergo R.I. for five years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default, to suffer R.I. for three months for the offence under Section 306 IPC.

(2.) The facts that arise for consideration and briefly be stated as follows: The appellant herein is the 1st accused in S.C.No, 61 of 1998. The deceased-Shaik Mallika, is the wife of the appellant. Their marriage took place about 12 years prior to the incident. At the time of marriage the parents of the deceased presented 8 tulas of gold and cash of Rs. 8,000/- towards dowry to the accused. Five years after the marriage a male child was born to the deceased. As the deceased did not be got children till the birth of a male child, the accused were harassing her. A-l expressed his intention to marry another woman. When the deceased refused for the 2nd marriage, A-l bea,t the deceased and drove her out of the house. Thereupon, the deceased went to her parents' house. The parents of the deceased took the deceased to the house of A-l and left, the deceased there. A-l to A-3 harassed the deceased mentally and physically. On 23-08-1997 at about 5.30 p.m., while the deceased was preparing tea by litting the stove, A-l came and picked up a quarrel with the deceased, abused her and told her that he would marry again, if she died. So, with art "intention to kill the deceased A-l picked up the kerosene oil tin and poured it over the deceased and drenched her clothes while the deceased was litting the stove, and, flames surrounded the deceased and her clothes caught fire. A-l closed the doors and bolted from out side. After some time, on hearing the cries of the deceased, A-l and A-2 opened the door. Hearing the cries of the deceased, one Mumthaz-P.W. 2 and one Syed Parveen rushed to the scene of offence and found burn injuries all over thebody of the deceased without clothing. The said Mumthaz and Parveen dressed the deceased. On coming to know about the incident, P.W. 3 Sk. Niyamathullah, P.W. 5 Sk. Gudaba-P.W. 5, and P.W. 6 Shaik Mubarak rushed to the scene of offence. Then A-l and A-2 took the deceased to the Government Hospital, Cuddapah where the deceased gave a statement to the police and basing on which a case in Crime No. 20 of 1997 was registered. The I Additional Munsif Magistrate, Cuddapah recorded a dying declaration of the deceased. The deceased while undergoing treatment, died in the hospital on 29-08-1997 at 6.30 p.m., by succumbing to the burn injuries. On receipt of the death information, the said offence was altered into Secs. 498-A, 506, 302 and 316 IPC, and after completing the investigation, the Inspector of Police filed the charge-sheet. The plea of the accused for the charges under Sections 498-A, 506, 302 and 316 IPC is one of denial.

(3.) The prosecution in all examined 16 witnesses i.e., P.Ws. 1 to 16, and marked Exs.P-1 to P-20. Ex.P-4 is the hospital intimation; Ex.P-5 is the dying declaration; Ex.P-6 is the endorsement of the duty doctor; Ex.P-10 is the inquest report; Ex.P-12 is the post-mortem certificate; Ex.P-13 is the original FIR; Ex.P-17 is the altered FIR; Ex.P-18 is the endorsement of the Doctor; Ex.P-19 is the intimation received by Head Constable and Ex.P-20 is the statement recorded by P.W. 15-Head Constable. P.W. 1-Shaik Anwar Basha is the brother of the deceased-Mallika, who deposed that five years after the marriage the deceased begot one male child. The deceased and A-l were living happily at Chaki Banda. At about 9.00 or 9.30 p.m. A-l and A-2 came to his house in a jeep along with the deceased with burn injuries and they stated that the deceased received burn injuries due to explosion of stove. He took the deceased to the Hospital and admitted her into Government Hospital. This witness is treated as hostile and cross-examined by the prosecution. It was elicited during his cross- examination that A-l admitted the deceased in Government Hospital, Cuddapah, and he was present when the Police recorded the statement of the deceased, and his relations were also present. Half-an-hour later before the registration, Magistrate came to the hospital, and all his relations were present at the bed side of the deceased when the Magistrate came to the Hospital. It is also in his evidence that his deceased sister, never complained against his brother-in-law (A-l) for all the 12 years since her marriage. P.W. 2-Shaik Mumtaz, who is the neighbour, deposes that her house is situated 3 houses away from the house of A-l and while she was working in her house, a boy came and informed that the deceased caught fire. On that, she went inside the house of the deceased and the deceased informed her that she received burn injuries due to fall on stove. This witness is also treated as hostile by the prosecution. P.W. 3-Shaik Niyamathulla, who claims that the deceased is his sister-in- law. He states that on the date of the offence he was in his house and after hearing the cries of the deceased he went and saw the deceased with burn injuries and he enquired the deceased how she received injuries. She stated that she received burn injuries due to stove. This witness is also treated as hostile. P.W. 4-Smt. G. Swarnalatha, who is working as Additional. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, speaks about recording the dying declaration of the deceased on 23-08-1997 at about 10.45 p.m. According to her she received requisition from Government Head Quarters Hospital, Cuddapah. P.W. 5- Sk. Gudaba, expressed his ignorance about the incident. P.W. 6-Shaik Mubarak also expressed his ignorance and categorically denied about himself rushing to the scene of offence and hearing cries. P.W. 7-Sk. Kareem Sab, denied about holding of any mediation inbetween the deceased and the 1st accused. This witness is also treated as hostile. P.W. 8- V.Sankar Reddy, speaks about signing on the inquest report. P.W. 9-S. Md. Hidayathullah, is also treated as hostile. He deposed that he was not present when the police held inquest over the dead body of the deceased. This witness also did not speak anything about the incident. P.W. 10-Shaik Kahaja Meah deposed that he was present when the inquest was held over the dead body of the deceased on 30-08-1997 from 12.00 Noon to 2.00 p.m. He also deposed about signing on the inquest report-Ex.P-10. P.W. 11-Shaik Azimunnisa expressed her ignorance about the incident. P.W. 12- Dr. B. Ramachandraiah, who conducted postmortem on the dead body of the deceased- Mallika on 30-08-1997 at 3.30 p.m., noticed the following: