VISHNU ULHAS RATHOD Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT No.1 is the son of appellant Nos.2 and 3. The appellants have been convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Washim for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellants along with accused No.4-Bhimrao Hiraman Jadhav were charge-sheeted by Washim Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 304-B and 498-A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) 'The appellants had allegedly, in furtherance of their common intention, committed murder of the deceased Poonam Vishnu Rathod-the wife of appellant No.1 by setting her on fire and had allegedly subjected her to cruelty and harassment in connection with demand of money and as a result of which the deceased Poonam had died under the circumstances otherwise than normal circumstances within seven years of her marriage. It is alleged that willful conduct of the appellants and accused No.4 was sufficient to drive the said Poonam to commit suicide. After the trial, accused No.4 has been acquitted by the learned trial Court and the appellants have been convicted. The order passed against the appellants by the learned trial Court runs as under:-

(3.) 'The prosecution case can be revealed from the statements of brother and father recorded by the police as well as from the dying declaration recorded by the Executive Magistrate. Badri Changu Jadhav and Bhaurao Badrising Jadhav are the father and brother respectively of the deceased Poonam. The deceased Poonam was youngest daughter of Badri Jadhav. The deceased Poonam was married to appellant No.1 in the year 2006. It is alleged that the entire expenditure of the marriage was borne by the father and brother of the deceased. Appellant Nos.2 and 3 parents-in-law of the deceased were residing with the deceased Poonam and her husband-appellant No.1 at Sevdas Nagar, Manora, District-Washim. It is stated that there was no problem for initial two to three months of the marriage. During the said period of two to three months, the deceased was being treated very nicely. It is stated that later on appellants used to assault the deceased on account of some domestic issues. They were also demanding Rs.25,000/- from the deceased to meet the agricultural expenditure. The deceased used to tell these things to his brother and father. The deceased had delivered a child at her parents' residence and thereafter she had returned to her matrimonial home. However, she had visited her parents house on Rakshabandhan. At that time she was alone. She had told her father that she had been asked by appellant No.1 to bring money from her father. The brother of the deceased had taken her back to her matrimonial home and had told the appellants that he was unable to fulfill the demands of the appellants. It is alleged that the father of the deceased had received telephonic message on the next day of this incident that her daughter had been admitted to Rural Hospital, Manora. The deceased had sustained extensive burn injuries. She had stated before her brother Bhaurao that she was assaulted by the appellants on the earlier day of the incident. She had further stated that appellant Nos.1 to 3 and accused No.4 had poured kerosene on her and set her on fire in the morning.