She categorically stated that on 11.6.1990, while her mother was in the kitchen, the appellant came there, poured kerosene upon her and set fire.
The latter came to the hospital and recorded the dying declaration Ext.
The prosecution evidence also reveals that on receipt of telephonic call from the doctor of Government Hospital, Chintamani Town, A.N. Ranjanna PW 14 who was then working as Police Sub Inspector, Chintamani Town Police Station, reached the hospital and recorded the statement of Naremma.
By judgement dated 4.6.1997, the trial companyrt discarded the prosecution evidence, which included the statement of PW 1 Smt.
On an appeal preferred by the State of Karnataka, the High Court re appreciated the evidence produced by the prosecution, reversed the judgment of acquittal, companyvicted the appellant under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/ .
P 18 and acquitted the appellant.
In their statements, P.Ws.
Naremma by pouring kerosene upon her and setting fire on 11.6.1990 in his house at Narasimhapet, Chintamani Town, Kolar District Karnataka .
P 15 and Ext.
Sujathamma, who is numbere else than the daughter of the appellant, and two dying declarations by Smt.
The allegation against the appellant was that he had murdered his wife Smt.
The High Court companyvicted the appellant by placing reliance upon the statement of P.W.1 Smt.
Sujathamma, which was amply companyroborated by the statements of P.W.3 Bayamma, W.4 Shri G.K. Shankarareddy and P.W.5 Basavaraj.
P 15 of Smt.
He then sent requisition to Tehsildar, Chintamani Town, namely, B.R. Krishnan PW 10 .
The High Court has given detailed reasons for relying upon the oral testimony of PW 1, PW 3, PW 4, PW 5, PW 10 and PW 14 and two dying declarations, i.e., Ext.Heard learned companynsel for the parties.
The appellant was tried for an offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code IPC .
Naremma Ext.
3, 4 and 5 gave out that they found the deceased burning and crying outside her house and they took her to the hospital.
Hence, this appeal.
Naremma.
In her statement, P.W.1 stated that few days before the date of occurrence, she had gone to the house of her parents as she 2/ 2 was in the family way and there she delivered a child.
