MOHD NASEEM KHAN Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant-sole accused filed this appeal against the judgment, dated 31. 3. 2006, in Sessions case No. 355 of 2003, on the file of the ii Additional Sessions Judge, Karimnagar at jagtial, in convicting and sentencing him to undergo Imprisonment for life of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian penal Code, 1860 (for brevity 'ipc' ).

(2.) THE case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows: pw1 is the father and PW4 is the sister of Afsari (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased' ). PW2 is the brother of PW1. The deceased wanted to marry the accused, who was already married and having two or three children. PW1 did not accept the proposal of the deceased and banged her. The deceased left the house and started living in the house of PW4. After some time, the accused took her stating that both of them would live at Metpalli. PW5 is the owner of the house at Metpalli in whose house both of them lived on rent. PW3 is the neighbour of the said house. A day after they joined in the new house, at about 1 or 2 p. m. , both the accused and the deceased came out of the house with flames and the accused ran away. The deceased informed PW3 that the accused poured kerosene and caused burn injuries. PW3 extinguished the flames and later his mother and others shifted the injured to government hospital at Metpalli. The admission of the deceased in the hospital was informed to PW1 and also to pw9-Sub-Inspector of Police. PW9 sent ex. P5-requisition to PW11-Judicial First class Magistrate, Metapalli, for recording dying declaration. PW9 proceeded to the hospital and recorded the statement of the deceased under Ex. P6 and basing on which, he registered a case in Cr. No. 99 of2001 under Section 307 IPC and issued ex. P7-First Information Report (FIR ). P. Ws. l, 2 and 4 proceeded to the hospital and when enquired, the deceased informed them how the incident took place. On 6. 9. 2001 at 3. 55 p. m. , PW11 received requisition for recording dying declaration. He proceeded to the hospital by 4 p. m. After satisfying himself, he recorded the dying declaration of the deceased under ex. P9. On the same day at 9 p. m. , the deceased died. Therefore, the Section of law was altered from 307 IPC to 302 IPC. PW10-Inspector of Police took up further investigation. On 7. 9. 2001, PW12-Mandal revenue Officer, Metpalli, conducted inquest over the dead body of the deceased in the presence of PW7 under Ex. P7-inquest panchanama. Thereafter, the body was sent to post-mortem examination. PW8-Civil assistant Surgeon, Government hospital, metpalli, conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased and issued Ex. P4-post-mortem certificate. On 29. 9. 2001, PW10 arrested the accused and after completion of investigation, he filed the charge-sheet.

(3.) THE learned Sessions Judge, framed the following charge against the accused: "that you on 6. 9. 2001, at about 14. 00 hours, at Chaithnyanagar, Metpalli, committed murder by intentionally causing the death of your wife, namely, Afsari, by pouring kerosene on her body and setting her ablaze due to family disputes and dislike on her and that thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. " when the above charge was read over and explained to the accused in Telugu, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.