On a reference being made under Section 366 of the Cr.
He also further said that he poured kerosene on the dead body of the deceased and set fire to the body.
He had the habit of taking liquor and for that purpose he used to often demand money from the deceased and used to assault her.
1999 Supp 3 SCR 89 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by PATTANAIK, J. This appeal by the State of Tamil Nadu is directed against the Judgment of the Division Bench of Madras High Court, against the acquittal of the respondent in Death Reference Case No.
She however died in the hospital on 11.4.94 at 7 P.M. The Sub Inspector of Police on the basis of statement received from PW 2, registered a case under Sections 436 and 302 I.P.C. and started investigation and on companypletion of investigation, submitted the charge sheet and on being companymitted, the accused stood his trial.
Out of their wedlock, two female children had been born named Jeeva, aged six years and Sita, aged two years.
By that time, wife of the accused and the youngest daughter Sita had already become victims and had met their death.
This was recorded by PW 2 and was sent to the Padalur Police Station.
The accused was number having any job and was solely dependant on his wife, the deceased.
The further prosecution case is that PW 5 met the accused on 11.4.94 at the bus stop and on questioning the accused about the setting fire of his house, he had stated that the deceased refused to serve meals to him and was also number giving money and as he had doubts about her chastity, so on the previous night he strangulated the deceased and has killed her.
P.W. 4 was present there in the house of PW 1 and was sleeping.
The eldest daughter, Jeeva was examined by doctor PW 8 and extensive burn injuries on her person were found.
On the very date of occurrence, there was a quarrel between the accused and the deceased at about 7 P.M. and it companytinued till about 9 P.M. PW 1, a close by neighbour however interfered and pacified, whereupon, she returned to her house which was hardly 150 feet away from the house of the accused.
169 of 1994.
2 of 1995, arising out of Sessions Case No.
Suddenly, he heard the cries of the eldest daughter of the deceased and when he came out, he found that the hut of the accused was on fire.
P.C. for companyfirmation of the death sentence, the High Court did number companyfirm the sentence of death and on the other hand acquitted the accused of the charges levelled against him and thus the present appeal.
The learned Sessions Judge companyvicted the accused respondent of the charge under Section 302 for having murdered his wife and two children brutally and sentenced him to death.
PW 1 and PW 4 then came near the house of the accused, whereupon PW 4 entered into the hut of the accused by jumping from the roof and rescued the eldest daughter.
PW 4 then took the eldest daughter to the Government Hospital at Thuraiyur, PW 1 went to her father PW 2 and narrated the incident.
The prosecution case in nutshell is that the accused and deceased Jayalakshmi were married together about eight years prior to the date of occurrence in 1994.
