In a recent verdict, the Supreme Court upheld the conviction and life imprisonment of an individual who committed an egregious act of setting his wife on fire. The court, presided over by Justices Bela M Trivedi and Ujjal Bhuyan, declared the act as ‘extreme cruelty,’ falling squarely under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) dealing with punishment for murder.
The bench, dismissing the appellant’s appeal, directed him to surrender before jail authorities within four weeks. Failing to comply would result in the issuance of non-bailable warrants against him, as outlined by the court.
The case originated with the filing of an FIR under Section 307 IPC, when the victim was admitted to the hospital with burn injuries, subsequently succumbing to them. The charges were upgraded to Section 302 IPC based on the victim’s dying declaration. The declaration revealed a disturbing pattern of abuse, indicating that the husband, an alcoholic, would violently demand money for liquor and resort to physical violence when denied.
The trial court, finding the appellant guilty under Section 302 IPC, sentenced him to life imprisonment. The High Court upheld this decision. In 2012, the appellant appealed to the Supreme Court, securing temporary release on bail due to his previous incarceration.
The appellant argued that he did not intend to kill his wife, contending that his actions fell under Part 1 of Section 304 IPC rather than Section 302. Senior Advocate Sirajudeen, representing the appellant, relied on the dying declaration to support this claim.
During the proceedings, the court expressed dissatisfaction with the absence of a State-appointed counsel and appointed Amicus Curiae Aditya Singh. Singh, asserting the appellant’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt, argued against interference with the concurrent findings of the lower courts.
The Supreme Court, after careful consideration, noted that the appellant’s plea was not raised during trial or at the statement recording under Section 313 CrPC. Finding no flaws in the lower court judgments, the appeal was ultimately dismissed.
The counsels involved were Senior Advocate Sirajudeen, AOR Revathy Raghavan, Advocates Divya Singhvi, Arya Kumari, and Satender Kr Vashistha for the appellant, and Advocates Aditya Singh (Amicus Curiae) and Kamal Kishore for the respondent in the case Naresh v. State of NCT of Delhi, Criminal Appeal No.1189/2012.
Loading...
Reload document 
Open in new tab 
