MIDDOLLA HARIJANA THIMMAIAH Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Appeal is directed against the Judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hindupur in S.C.No. 344 of 2000 by the appellant-accused No. 1. The appellant-accused No. 1 and three others were charged for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 450 r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. Accused 2 to 4 were acquitted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge; however, the appellant-accused No. 1 was found guilty of the offences under Secs. 302 and 450 IPC and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for six months for the offence under Section 302 IPC. He was also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months for the offence under Sec. 450 IPC.

(2.) The case of the prosecution can be traced out succinctly as follows: The appellant-accused No. 1 and the deceased were closely related to each other. The appellant is the husband of the deceased's maternal aunt. On 30-07-1999 from about 9.00 a.m. to 3.00 p.m. the deceased attended to the white washing of the appellant's house. On 02-08-1999 the appellant along with his brother A-2, his wife A-3 and his son-in-law A-4 went to the deceased's house and enquired about the missing cash or Rs. 3,000/- alleging that the deceased has stolen it while she was white washing his house on 30-7-1999. The deceased denied the allegation and there was some altercation. Again, on 04-8-1999 the appellant along with other accused went to the deceased's house and questioned the deceased about the missing cash. The deceased reiterated her denial. Finally on 05-08-1999 the appellant and other accused trespassed into the house of the deceased in the absence of her husband and demanded return of the missing cash. When the deceased denied the same, A-2 and A-3 dragged the deceased and the appellant poured kerosene on her and set her on fire and then all the accused left the house. The deceased not in a position to bear the flames, ran to her neighbours house, who put off flames. The Village Administrative Officer on hearing the said incident, proceeded to the deceased house and recorded the statement Ex.P-1 dying declaration and he lodged a complaint with Station House Officer, Parigi Police Station. P.W. 12, the A.S.I, registered a case in Crime No. 35 of 1999 under Section 448 and . 307 r/w 34 IPC. He took up investigation and proceeded to the scene of occurrence and recorded the statement of the deceased and P.Ws. 1 to 6 under Section 161 Cr.P.C. He also examined the scene of occurrence, seized the kerosene tin and burnt pieces of nylex saree in the presence of P.Ws. 1 and 2. In the meanwhile, the deceased was sent to Government hospital, Hindupur, where the dying declaration was recorded by P.W. 14, Judicial First Class Magistrate of Hindupur vide Ex. 21. On receipt of the death intimation, the provision of law was altered to that of Section 302 IPC. After the investigation, charge-sheet was laid in the Court of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Hindupur. Thereafter, the matter was taken up by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in S.C.No. 344 of 2000. The learned Additional Sessions Judge framed charges under Section 302 and 450 r/w Section 34 IPC. The accused pleaded not guilty and therefore, the trial was taken. Prosecution examined as many as 15 witnesses and marked documents Exs.P-1 to P-24. M.Os. 1 and 2 were also marked, which are plastic can and burnt saree pieces.

(3.) After considering the evidence adduced by the prosecution and also the material available on record, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted accused 2 to 4 and convicted and sentenced A-1 the appellant herein as referred to above. Against the said conviction and sentence, the present appeal has been preferred by the accused No. 1 appellant.