OM PARKASH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal has been preferred by appellant -Om Parkash, feeling dissatisfied against the judgment and order of conviction dated 17.04.2002/18.04.2002 whereby he has been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of '2000/ -and in default thereof, to undergo further simple imprisonment for 2 months, for the commission of murder of his wife. The case of the prosecution unfolded by Kamlesh, the second wife of Om Parkash -appellant, is that her husband has married twice. His first wife Smt. Santra gave birth to one daughter namely Kanta, who is married. About 14/15 years ago, she (Kamlesh) married Om Parkash and they have four children. Om Parkash always used to beat her as well as Smt. Santra after consuming liquor and used to command them to leave his house. On May 23, 2001 at about 7:00 P.M., Om Parkash asked Smt. Santra as usual to get out of the home but Smt. Santra refused to obey him. Then, Om Parkash splashed kerosene oil at Santra and set her on fire. Smt. Santra raised rescue call 'bachao -bachao' which attracted Sheela, her real sister and some other persons from the locality. Her sister as well as their neighbours tried to extinguish the fire by putting quilt on Smt. Santra but the fire could not be controlled and due to bums, she fell down in the court -yard. It has further been stated by Kamlesh that Om Parkash has set Smt. Santra ablaze with the intention of killing her. She was rushed to PGIMS, Rohtak. On the basis of the aforesaid statement of Smt. Kamlesh, the case was registered against Om Parkash - appellant, under Section 307 IPC. Subsequently, an application was moved by the Investigating Officer to the jurisdictional Illaqa Magistrate for getting the statement of Smt. Santra recorded with regard to the cause of burning and her statement was recorded by Sh. R.K. Sharma, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtak. During the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer also took the photographs of the place of incident, prepared site plan, took into possession one bottle of kerosene oil, one pair of Hawai Chappals, partially burnt clothes and match box by converting the same into parcels. Unfortunately, Smt. Santra succumbed to her injuries on May 28, 2001. He also prepared the inquest report and got conducted the autopsy on the dead body of Smt. Santra. The doctor, who conducted the autopsy, opined that patient Smt. Santra had died due to ante -mortem burns and its complications, which were sufficient to cause death in natural course of events. Accordingly, offence was enhanced to one under Section 302 IPC. Om Parkash was arrested by the police on May 24, 2001. After completion of the investigation, challan under Section 302 of the IPC was presented in the court of ld. Jurisdictional Magistrate, who after completing formalities, committed the case to the court of Sessions vide order dated August 03, 2001.

(2.) THERE being prima facie evidence appearing in the report under Section 173(2) of Cr.P.C. and the documents annexed with it, appellant -accused was charged to face trial under Section 302 IPC, for commission of the murder of his wife Smt. Santra. He did not plead guilty to the charge and claimed trial.

(3.) WHEN the incriminating circumstances, appearing in prosecution evidence were put to the accused for eliciting his explanation as required under Section 313 Cr.P.C., he denied all of them and pleaded innocence. He did not opt to adduce any evidence in his defence.