KALLU CHHIPA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HON'ble S. K. SHARMA, J.-The appellant was placed on trial before the learned Special Judge (Women Atrocities & Dowry Cases) and Additional Sessions Judge, Jaipur City/district Jaipur in Sessions Case No. 84/1997 for having committed murder of his wife Suman. Learned Trial Judge vide judgment dated December 3, 1997 convicted and sentenced the appellant as under:- U/s. 302 IPc to undergo Imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer three months Rigorous Imprisonment. U/s. 498a IPc to undergo Three Years Rigorous Imprisonment and fine of Rs. 500/- in default to further suffer Three Months Rigorous Imprisonment. Sentences were ordered to run concurrently. , +

(2.) POLICE Station Nahargarh road jaipur initially registered a case under Sec. 307 IPC on the basis of parcha bayan (Ex. P-2) of Suman (now deceased), which was recorded in the burn unit of SMS Hospital, Jaipur on March 26, 1996. In the parcha bayan Suman stated that the appellant used to torture her and on the day of incident the appellant sprinkled Kerosene oil on her and set her ablaze. On the basis of said Parcha Bayan investigation commenced and after death of Suman the case was converted into one under Sec. 302 IPC. Necessary memos were drawn, appellant was arrested and on completion of investigation charge sheet was filed. In due course the case came up for trial before the learned Special Judge (Women Atrocities & Dowry Cases and Additional Sessions Judge, Jaipur City/district Jaipur, Charges under Sections 302 and 498a IPC were framed against the appellant, who denied the charges and claimed trial. The prosecution in support of its case examined as many as 18 witnesses. In the explanation under Sec. 313 Cr. P. C. the appellant claimed innocence and stated that at the time of incident he was sleeping in the room which was bolted from the out side and got opened by one Chauthmal. After coming out of the room appellant found Suman burning on road. The appellant made attempt to save her life and got himself burnt. The appellant examined Chauth Mal in support of his defence. Learned trial Judge on hearing final submissions convicted and sentenced the appellant as indicated herein above.

(3.) LEARNED Public Prosecutor for the State in support of the impugned judgment submitted that the trial court rightly relied on the testimony of Dr. Raj Kumar Paliwal (PW. 18), Ram Karan ASI (PW. 1) and other witnesses as there was no infirmity in there evidence. LEARNED PP urged that testimony of Chauth Mal did not inspire confidence and his presence in the house of the appellant in the odd hours is doubtful. Injuries by human tooth bite on the hand of the appellant show that they were caused by Suman while making attempt to save her life. The appellant and received burn injuries on his hand while he pushed Suman down on the road.