THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1423 of 2007 18-07-2014 BETWEEN:
Mohammad Saleem …..Appellant/Accused AND The State of A.P., rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh …..Respondent THIS COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING JUDGMENT:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1423 of 2007 JUDGMENT:
The Criminal Appeal is preferred by the appellant/accused challenging the Judgment, dated 08.12.2006, in SC. No.6 of 2005 passed by the Hon’ble III Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Nizamabad, whereby the learned Judge found the appellant/accused guilty for the offence under Section 304-B IPC and accordingly convicted and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only), in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of three months.
The case of the prosecution is as follows:-
P.Ws.1 and 2 are the husband and wife. The deceased Mallika Begum and P.W.7 are their daughters. P.Ws.1 and 2 performed the deceased’s marriage with the accused 2 ½ years prior to the date of occurrence, and at the time of marriage, P.Ws.1 and 2 gave clothes and all the household articles and promised to give cot and bet after sometime. That P.Ws.1 and 2 have fixed the marriage of P.W.7 on 15.08.2004 and invited the deceased and accused to the said marriage. The accused started harassing the deceased demanding to bring cot and bed from her parents alleging that though they have sufficient money, they are not giving cot and bed to him. After the marriage of P.W.7, the accused went to the house of P.Ws.1 and 2 and in the absence of P.W.1, he quarreled with the deceased and took her away in an auto to a room which he obtained on rent in Nizamabad. On 25.08.2004 at about 8.00 am the accused beat the deceased and abused her demanding to get bed and cot from her parents or bring money from them, for that the deceased expressed inability of her parents to fulfill the promise made in their marriage and refused to go to her parents’ house. While continuing the quarrel the accused poured kerosene on the deceased and handed over matchstick asking her to set fire, on that she lit the matchstick and set fire to her body. On raising hue and cries, P.Ws.3 and 4 saw the deceased and extinguished flames by covering her body with bed sheet. In the meanwhile, the accused came out of his house, then P.Ws.3 and 4 put the deceased and the accused in an auto and sent them to hospital and gave information to P.W.1, that the deceased was admitted in hospital with burns. Basing on the complaint lodged by P.W.1, the police registered the case and investigated the matter. After completion of the investigation police filed charge sheet against the accused for the offence under Section 304-B IPC.
To prove the guilt of the accused, P.Ws.1 to 12 were examined and Exs.P.1 to P.9 and M.Os.1 to 6 were marked on behalf of the prosecution. No oral or documentary evidence was adduced on behalf of the accused.
On appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court found the appellant/accused guilty for the offence under Section 304-B IPC and convicted and sentenced him as stated above.
Heard and perused the record.
After evaluating and examining the material available on record and considering the respective submissions of the learned counsel, this Court is of the view that there are no special or adequate reasons, warranting interference by this Court with the Judgment passed by the trial Court.
At this stage, the learned counsel for the appellant/accused confines his argument with regard to quantum of sentence and submits that the appellant/accused has to lookafter his old aged parents and as such, he prays this Court to show leniency while imposing sentence of imprisonment.
Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant/accused and the nature of offence, and also in view of long lapse of time, this Court is inclined to take a lenient view.
In the result, the conviction recorded by the trial Court against the appellant/accused herein for the offence Section 304-B IPC is hereby confirmed. However, this Court, taking a lenient view, modifies and reduces the sentence of imprisonment to the period, which the appellant/accused has already undergone. The sentence of fine and default condition, imposed by the Court below, is not interfered with by this Court.
Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is partly allowed. Consequently, the miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this appeal, shall stand closed.
JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO 18.07.2014 pln