TILUMAI GOGOI Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 03.09.2001 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Lakhimpur, North Lakhimpur, in Sessions Case No. 84(NL) of 2000 convicting the appellant under Section 302 IPC and sentencing him to undergo R.I. for life and pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default further R.I. for another six months. The case, in brief, as projected by the prosecution is that on 12.8.2009, at about 6 AM, while the informant was ploughing in the field, his father Manikanta Gogoi informed him that some mishap had occurred and asked him to come home immediately. He rushed home and found his 2nd wife Minakshi inside the room in a severely burnt state and in distress. On his query, the victim could somehow tell that appellant Tilumai poured kerosene and burnt her. Hearing the hue and cry, the neighbours, including the village headman assembled and in their presence the victim disclosed that the appellant set fire on her. The appellant, surprisingly, left the house after the incident with her two children. Injured Minakshi was shifted to hospital for treatment, but she expired on the way. Her body was taken to Ghilamorah Police outpost where the informant lodged a written Ejahar against the appellant. The police registered a case being Dhakhukhana PS Case No. 167/1999 under Section 302 IPC. During investigation the I.O. visited the place of occurrence, held inquest, recorded the statements of the witnesses and sent the dead body for postmortem examination. After collection of the post mortem examination report and on completion of the investigation, the I.O. laid the charge-sheet against the appellant under Section 302 IPC. The Court of Sessions on receipt of the case records on committal, framed a charge under Section 302 IPC against the appellant to which she pleaded not guilty and demanded trial. Accordingly, she stood the trial. The prosecution examined 11 witnesses including the medical officer to establish the charge. The appellant also examined one witness in her defence. At the conclusion of trial, the learned trial court on the basis of the materials and evidence on record and upon hearing the parties, passed the impugned judgment and order convicting and sentencing the appellant as mentioned earlier.

(2.) Heard Mr. R.K. Adhikari, learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant and Mr. K.A. Mazumdar, learned Addl. P.P. for the Respondent State.

(3.) We now undertake an exercise to appreciate the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. The first witness is the husband of the deceased who lodged the FIR. He is not an eye witness to the alleged occurrence of setting fire on his deceased 2nd wife. He was ploughing in the field and he came home on being informed by his father. When he arrived home, he found his victim wife sitting on the floor inside the room in a burnt condition with completely burnt dress. She was not in a position to talk and as he enquired about the incident the victim told him that the appellant set fire on her by pouring kerosene and as a result she was burnt. He informed the village Headman Sri Purnananda Gogoi who came to his house immediately. His wife told the village Headman that the appellant set fire on her by pouring kerosene. In cross examination he stated that he married the victim just 1 1/2 months prior to the incident. He never noticed quarrel between his first wife (the appellant) and 2nd wife (the deceased) after the marriage. Few days before the incident his 2nd wife Minakshi went to her father's house to attend a marriage ceremony and she came back after staying only one day. He also stated that on the date of occurrence he did not quarrel with the appellant and denied the suggestion that a dispute took place between him and his wife (appellant) on the previous day of the incident. He also denied the suggestion that he took dinner in the house of the appellant on the previous day. His two wives used separate kitchens and he slept with Minakshi (2nd wife) in the night. He denied that due to quarrel with the deceased he took meal in the house of the appellant and due to depression his 2nd wife committed suicide. He also denied the suggestion that the deceased had not made a statement before her death that the accused set fire on her by pouring kerosene and that he tried to hide his guilt by filing a false case against the appellant in a planned manner. He, however, stated that he did not know whether, while taking the victim to hospital, the villagers, namely Shri Haren Gogoi, Naren Gogoi and Muluka Gogoi who were proceeding in the boat, had heard the dying declaration of the deceased. He disclosed that Manikanta Gogoi, P.W. 2 and Niroda (P.W. 5) are his father and elder sister respectively. The other persons namely Haren Gogoi, Naren Gogoi, Muluka Gogoi and Zinty Gogoi are also his close relatives.