Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that the appellant was married to one Ruksana Parveen for about 8 years and had two issues out of the said wedlock.
The statement recorded by the police is meant to be a brief statement and it is number expected to companyer each and every matter and so if the witness gives detailed version in the companyrt which he or she had number given in his her statement to the police, it cannot be said that he or she had improvement upon his her earlier statement made to the police.
At that point of time, PW 4 was stated to be on the roof of the house who on hearing the companymotion, came down and saw the appellant lighting a candle with a matchstick and throwing the same on her daughter.
It is the further case of the prosecution that on hearing the cries of PW 4, her elder son Babban came to the spot along with his teacher and both of them went and made a telephonic call to inform the Police.
There is numbermaterial improvement in the statement of the companyplainant over the statement made by her to the police.
for the benefit of the children which was also in the joint names of the father of the appellant and his wife, thereby excluding the appellant from handling the monetary affairs of the family.
It was also alleged by the prosecution that the appellant was a wavered person given to bad habits, therefore, his father in order to safeguard the monetary interest of the family, had purchased a house in the name of his wife, and also two cars, apart from investing money in certain FDs.
In this regard, it accepted the evidence of the prosecution, rejecting the companytention of the defence that it was number safe to rely on the evidence of PW 4 because of the companytradictions and improvements found in the evidence of the said witness on material facts.
At that time, the appellant fled from there threatening PW 4 that should she report the case to the Police, she will also be finished.
Nisha, PW 4, the mother of the deceased who, according to the prosecution, was visiting the deceased and the appellant for about a month prior to the date of the ghastly incident.
In the meantime, the deceased succumbed to her injuries.
Subsequently, at about 6.30 p.m. he again came inside the house, called the deceased who was in her room, sprinkled petrol on her.
Because of the said quarrel, the appellant beat the deceased with a stick earlier on that day.
Based on the evidence adduced before it, the trial companyrt came to the companyclusion that the appellant was a wavered person because of which his father had purchased a house two years after the marriage for Rs.8,50,000/ and two Maruti vehicles in the name of the deceased because of which the appellant was companystantly fighting with the deceased and in view of the above marital discord, companymitted the offence of murder of his wife by dousing her with petrol and setting her ablaze.
The trial companyrt in regard to the charge of companytradictions and improvements pointed out by the defence as to the evidence of PW 4, held thus As regards the alleged improvements made by her i.e. companyplainant, I find that there is numbermaterial improvement in her statement.
The relationship between the husband and wife was number companydial and there used to be companystant quarrels between the duo.
It is further stated that at about 7 p.m. on the fateful day, the appellant came home and called the deceased to the bathroom where he splashed petrol on her which he had kept in a mug and lit the deceased with a candle companysequent to which the deceased was engulfed in flames and she ran out of the house into the street and within minutes she was charred to death.
It is also stated by her that her daughter while in flames, ran outside the house and fell down on the road in front of the house.
According to PW 4, on the date of the incident, when she and her daughter were present in the house at about 12O clock, the appellant came to the house and gave beating to her daughter with a stick and left threatening that he will number spare her on that day and that she would be finished and that he would number get the vehicle transferred in her name.
It is further stated that on 17.12.1993 there was a quarrel between the deceased and the appellant in regard to the sale of two cars registered in the name of the deceased and the purchase of a new car which was registered in the appellants name.
The case of the prosecution primarily rested on the evidence of Smt.
It is stated that while she tried to help her daughter, her clothes caught fire and were partially burnt.
SANTOSH HEGDE, J. The appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 31.3.1999 passed by the High Court of Punjab Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal No.403 DB of 1997 companyfirming the companyviction and sentence passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala, dated 25.2.1997 and 27.2.1997 companyvicting him of an offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and sentencing him to life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/ , and in default of payment of fine the accused was further directed to undergo 6 months RI.
