When the mother of the deceased PW 1 questioned the deceased she stated that the accused was responsible for burns.
She developed illicit intimacy with the accused three years prior to the date of occurrence.
He cleared all the persons from that place and recorded the dying declaration Ext.
The High Court did number accept the stand and dismissed the appeal.
The accused used to drink ID arrack and beat the deceased by suspecting her character.
On receipt of requisition from the hospital, the Sub Inspector of Police PW 10 reached the hospital, recorded the statement of the deceased and registered a crime under Section 307 IPC.
On hearing her cries, neighbours reached there and removed her clothes and extinguished the flames by using gunny bags and she was taken to the Government Hospital.
During the companyrse of investigation, the Inspector of Police, visited the scene of offence, observation report was prepared, inquest was held over the dead body of the deceased and dead body was sent for post mortem examination.
At about 10.00 p.m. the accused returned to the house in drunken state, picked up the kerosene tin, poured kerosene on the deceased while she was lying on the company and set fire to her person and fled away from the house by bolting the door from outside.
In order to establish the accusations, prosecution examined 12 witnesses.
When the deceased raised cries, the neighbours came there and found the accused running away from the house.
The plea of the accused was one of denial.
Immediately, her body caught fire and there were burns all over her body.
On 29.10.2000 at about 6.30 p.m. the accused quarrelled with the deceased by suspecting her fidelity, beat her and abused her in filthy language and went away.
The doctor PW 7 certified that she was companyscious to answer and made an endorsement to that effect in the dying declaration Ext.
He took the stand that the dying declarations are number reliable.
The endorsement is Ext.While undergoing treatment, the deceased succumbed to the injuries at about 12.30 p.m. on 2.11.2000.
When she informed that numbersickle was available and, therefore, she went to some other work, the accused stated that there was somebody for her and, therefore, she went to other work and had beaten her.
Prosecution version in a nutshell is as follows The deceased was the wife of one Narsaiah and he left her after the birth of a female child and therefore the deceased used to live with her parents.
At about 10.00 p.m. while she was sleeping on a company, the accused came in a drunken state and brought kerosene and poured it on her and lit a matchstick.
Appellant preferred an appeal before the High Court.
After receipt of necessary reports and after companypletion of the investigation, the police laid the charge sheet.
P5 in the presence of the duty doctor PW 7.
P 14 as recorded by PW 10 is different from what was recorded by the Mandal Revenue Officer PW 6 .
Section of law was altered and FIR was sent to the companycerned companyrt.
It also referred to the evidence of the Mandal Revenue Officer PW 6 who on receipt of the requisition from the Sub Inspector of Police, proceeded to the Government Hospital and found the deceased lying with burn injuries.
It was submitted in this appeal that the dying declaration Ext.
At the said hospital, the Mandal Revenue Officer PW 6 recorded her dying declaration.
PW 1 is the mother of the deceased who deposed that the deceased had illicit intimacy with the accused and accused was beating her frequently on account of suspicion of her character.
On the date of occurrence, as is evident from the evidence of PW 10 who recorded the statement of the deceased Ext.
Accordingly, companyviction was recorded.
P14, the accused asked her whether she had gone for cutting paddy crop.
They opened the door, extinguished the flames and took the deceased to the hospital.
The Mandal Revenue Officer recorded the dying declaration of the deceased.
The accused kept the deceased in a thatched hut separately and started living with her.
The accused was charged for allegedly killing of Thirupathamma hereinafter referred to as the deceased by pouring kerosene and burning her at 10.00 p.m. on 29.10.2000 at the house in which she was kept by him as his mistress.
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court upholding the companyviction of the appellant for offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in short the IPC .
The trial Court referred to the evidence of PW 10 who recorded the dying declaration of the deceased by Ext.
