SATISH Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an Appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, questioning conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant on the charge of uxoricide.

(2.) Shorn of the details, prosecution case is to the effect that the deceased was married to the appellant in the year 1994. He was a small time road side vendor. He was harbouring a grudge against her firstly, because she was unable to conceive any issue and secondly, he was harbouring an impression that she was a bad omen since his business was not flourishing. He was having a brother but both were separate. They were residing in the same house, but his brother was residing with his family on the ground floor whereas the appellant with his deceased wife were residing on upper floor. It is alleged that though his mother Vatsalabai (PW10) was usually residing with his brother on the ground floor being aged about 80 years, she was staying with him on the upper floor since about two to three days prior to the incident. It is then alleged that in the night of 20.07.2009 a quarrel took place between the couple before everyone went to sleep. The old lady slept on a cot whereas the couple slept on a mattress on the floor. It is then alleged that some time in the night the appellant killed his wife by stabbing her with a knife on the chest.

(3.) It is then alleged that the appellant then went to the house of informant Vasant (PW 2) who was staying in the same town Nanded, in the wee hours at about 4 a.m. and by awakening him confessed about having killed his wife Savita. Vasant (PW 2) happens to be maternal uncle of Savita. Having heard the news Vasant (PW 2) rushed to the house of his niece and having found her dead, went to the Police Station and lodged the FIR (Exhibit 14). Shaikh Yousuf (PW 9) who was then Officer in charge of the concerned Police Station received the complaint and registered Crime No. 92/2009, for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Further investigation was handed over to Sub-Inspector Bhutkar (PW 11). It is then alleged that Bhutkar went to the spot and conducted inquest (Exhibit 26) in presence of panch witnesses Kailash (PW 7). He also conducted a seizure memo in respect of the blood stained bedding and another panchanama seizing a blood stained knife from the spot (Exhibit 38) in presence of panch witnesses Kailash (PW 7). In the meanwhile, it is alleged that the appellant surrendered himself by going to the Police Station and was taken in the custody. The blood stained clothes on his person were seized under a memorandum (Exhibit 20) in presence of panch witnesses Balaji (PW 4). All the muddemmal articles were sent for chemical analysis. The dead body was forwarded for post mortem examination. Dr. Dange (PW 1) conducted post mortem examination and noticed that the deceased had following injuries :