ALLAUDDIN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred by the original accused No. 2 against the judgment and order dated 04.09.2012 in Sessions Case No. 4/2012 passed by the Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Osmanabad, whereby accused No. 2 has been convicted of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and fne of Rs. 5,000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for one year. Accused Nos. 1 to 3 have been acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 498A r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Accused Nos. 1 and 3 have been acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 307 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Prosecution case can be briefy stated as under :- Deceased Hasinabee was the wife of accused No. 1. Accused No. 2 (appellant herein) is the father-in-law of the deceased Hasinabee and accused No. 3 is the mother-in-law of the deceased Hasinabee. PW 3 Dadamiyan is the brother of the deceased Hasinabee and PW 4 Rashidabee is the mother of the deceased Hasinabee. It is the case of the prosecution that marriage between accused No. 1 and the deceased Hasinabee was solemnized about one year before the incident. Accused Nos. 1 to

(3.) were staying together at the time of marriage. The deceased was maintained well for a period of one month after marriage. Thereafter, all the accused started ill-treating her saying that she is a bad cook and that she could not do household chores and used to beat her. It is also the case of the prosecution that accused No. 2/appellant used to demand sexual favour from the deceased Hasinabee. He used to say that she should allow him to share bed. She had informed PW 3 and PW 4 about the ill- treatment on telephone. When she refused to oblige accused No. 2, accused No.2 beat her. Therefore, accused No. 1 showed willingness to live separately from accused Nos. 2 and 3 and demanded Rs.20,000/- from PW 3 Dadamiya. PW 3 paid Rs.20,000/- to accused No. 1 but he did not live separately. On 17.01.2011 at about 5.30 pm, he received phone call from an unknown number that his sister Hasinabee had suffered burn injuries and she was admitted to Civil Hospital, Osmanabad. On reaching Osmanabad, he asked the deceased about the incident and she told him that the appellant said to her that she should allow him to share bed and when she refused, he poured kerosene on her and set her on fre. 3. The deceased was admitted in the hospital by the appellant. Intimation of admission of burnt patient was given to the Police Station vide letter Exhibit 28. PW 2 Police Naik Rajasab Fulari approached Medical Offcer Dr. Pathan. After obtaining certifcate of ftness of Hasinabee to give dying declaration from Dr. Pathan, he recorded the dying declaration of the deceased on \ 17.01.2011. In the dying declaration, the deceased stated that on 17.01.2011 at 4.00 to 5.00 pm, all the accused alongwith her brother-in-law, were present. They started saying that she did not do household chores. Her father-in-law i.e. the appellant said as to why she did not allow him to share bed and poured kerosene on her and set her on fre. It is also stated in the dying declaration that when people gathered, the appellant poured water on her and extinguished the fre and admitted her to the hospital.