Court says accused acted with “cruelty” and blocked all chances of rescue
Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has upheld the conviction and life sentence of a Solapur tailor, Ambadas Chandrakant Aaretta, for the brutal murder of his wife, Pushpa, whom he set ablaze after pouring kerosene on her and locking her inside their house.
A Division Bench comprising Justices Sarang Kotwal and Shyam Chandak delivered the judgment on June 12, rejecting Aaretta’s appeal that his actions were not premeditated and should be treated as culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The High Court strongly disagreed, stating:
“In the present case, after setting Pushpa on fire, the Appellant took the children out of the house and had latched the door from outside when Pushpa was still burning inside. He prevented anybody else to help Pushpa… All this conduct is definitely cruel.”
The incident occurred on the night of February 10, 2014. Following a heated argument, Aaretta woke Pushpa from sleep, doused her with kerosene, and set her on fire. Despite efforts from their young children to extinguish the flames, Aaretta forcibly removed them from the house and locked the door, ensuring no one could intervene.
Pushpa suffered 94% burns and succumbed to her injuries the next day. Before her death, she gave two consistent dying declarations—one to a magistrate and another to a police constable—both naming Aaretta as the attacker. She also made an oral statement to her brother.
The Court noted that these declarations were “properly recorded, medically endorsed and corroborated by witness testimony and forensic evidence,” including kerosene traces on the victim, the scene, and the accused’s clothes.
Aaretta’s defense counsel had argued that the act followed a sudden quarrel and lacked intent. However, the Court rejected this line of argument, ruling that the accused “had taken undue advantage of the vulnerability of his own wife and children” and could not claim the benefit of Exception 4 to Section 300 of the IPC.
“The Appellant cannot claim benefit of taking his case within Exception 4 to Section 300 of IPC,” the Court said, citing the deliberate cruelty involved.
Finding no fault in the trial court’s judgment, the High Court concluded:
“The learned Judge has given proper reasons in convicting and sentencing the Appellant. As a result, the Appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed.”
The judgment reaffirms the gravity with which courts treat acts of domestic violence that culminate in such heinous crimes.
Case: Ambadas Chandrakant Aaretta vs State of Maharashtra – Available on LAWFYI.IO
