DILIP MATRE Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT has filed this appeal against the judgment dated 7-4-2004, passed by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Balaghat, in Sessions Trial No. 131/03, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Sections 498-A and 307, IPC and sentenced to RI for 2 years and fine of Rs. 200/- and RI for 5 " years and fine of Rs. 800/-, in default of payment of fine, further RI for six months on each count, respectively. Both the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the prosecution story is that the appellant was married to complainant Kantibai on 25-4-2003. When she went to her in-law's house for the first time, appellant beat her on the ground that she had not brought T. V. She went back to her mother's house. Thereafter, when she returned back, appellant refused to keep her. She lodged the report against the appellant. There was a Panchayat and the dispute was resolved. It is said that on the night of 29-6-2003, at about 9-10 O'clock, when appellant came home, he abused the complainant saying that she had not brought money of Bhatony, she should go out of the house else he will not leave her alive and also assaulted her. In the early morning of 30-6-2003, appellant sprinkled kerosene from the chimni on her and set her ablaze. She raised hue and cry and ran out of the house and extinguished fire by water kept in a pot. People from the neighbourhood also assembled there. Mother of the appellant took her to hospital, i. e. , PHC Lamta, where complainant lodged her report by way of Dehati Nalishi, Ex. P-l. Police registered the case under Sections 498-A and 307, IPC. Complainant was then referred to District Hospital, Balaghat, where Dr. P. K. Parashar (P. W. 6) treated her. The injuries of complainant were examined by Dr. V. K. Balbhadra (P. W. 5) at PHC, Lamta. After investigation, charge-sheet was filed and the case was committed for trial.

(3.) LEARNED Trial Court framed the charges under Sections 498-A and 307, IPC against the appellant which he abjured. During trial, prosecution examined 10 witnesses to bring home the charges against the appellant and the appellant also examined D. W. 1 Lalchand and D. W. 2 Tikendra Panjre in his defence.