NARASINGH CHALLAN Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is in challenge of the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 27.10.2006 passed by the learned Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Malkangiri in Criminal Trial No. 33/34 of 2006 arising out of G.R. Case No. 390 of 2005 in the Court of S.D.J.M., Malkangiri corresponding to Matheli P.S. Case No. 104 of 2005 finding the appellant guilty under Section 302 Cr.P.C. and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 5000/ -, in default, to undergo R.I. for six months. The appellant is the husband and the deceased is his wife. Deceased brother lodged F.I.R. on 5.11.2005 alleging that spouses used to quarrel over the husband not paying any heed to the wife's demand that her husband should stop looking after his deceased younger brother's widow and child and, ultimately, on 5.11.2005 while the wife was sitting near the door of their house, the husband started quarreling with her asking her to leave the house and on her denial he poured kerosene on her and set her on fire. The deceased started shouting and ran to the house of one Gurubari Chalan who extinguish the fire by pouring water on her.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant submits that the trial Court has failed to properly appreciate the evidence on the dying declaration of the deceased which, if considered along with the other facts and circumstances available, is devoid of any credibility. It is also contended that the learned trial Court failed to properly appreciate the evidence adduced by the defence as well as other evidence which supports the defence plea that it was the deceased who poured kerosene on her person and set herself on fire and getting information the appellant, who was then absent in his house, rushed to the spot and tried to extinguish the fire and in that process he himself received some burn injuries.

(3.) IN view of the rival submissions made by both sides the evidences on record are required to be analyzed in order to find out whether the finding of the learned trial Court is sustainable or not.