STATE Vs. RAGHUVIR A TANDEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present respondents alongwith their father and wife of respondent no.2 were prosecuted for an offence punishable under Sections 498a, 312 and 504 before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mapusa, in-charge of Pernem Court. THE learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pernem by his Judgment dated1st November 1999 convicted the respondent no.1 for an offence punishable under Sections 498a and 312 of the Indian Penal Code and convicted the respondent no.2 for an offence punishable under Sections 498a of the Indian Penal Code. THE father of the present respondents, who was original accused no.3, expired during the pendency of the trial. THE original accused no.4, wife of the present respondent no.2, was acquitted of the offence with which she was charged. THE respondents 1 and 2 also came to be acquitted by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Pernem for an offence punishable under Section504 of the Indian Penal Code. On appeal, the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mapusa, allowed the appeal filed by the present respondents and acquitted them of the offences with which they were convicted. THE State, being aggrieved by the Judgment of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mapusa, dated13th April 2000, acquitting the respondents, has filed the present appeal.

(2.) THE facts necessary for the decision of the appeal are set out hereunder : - On 15th September 1995 a complaint came to be filed by P. W.1 Reshma Tandel complaining of harassment and ill-treatment at the hands of her husband Raghuvir Tandel (A-1), Vijay Tandel, brother-in-law, (A-2), Pratima Vijay Tandel, wife of A-2 and Atmaram Tandel, father-in-law, A-3. An offence came to be registered on the basis of the said complaint vide Crime No. 80 of 1995 under Sections 498a, 312, 504 read with Section34 of the Indian Penal Code. THE complainant P. W.1 Reshma Tandel was referred to Goa Medical College, Bambolim, where she was examined by P. W.12 Dr. Silvano Dias Sapeco. On examination P. W.12 Dr. Sapeco vide his report at Exhibit P. W.12/a opined that the medical findings were in consistent with medical intervention, to terminate products of conception, during the first three months of Reshma's pregnancy. P. W.1 Reshma was also referred to the Institute of Psychiatry and Human Behaviour. She was examined by P. W.11 Dr. Maria Pareira, who is working as a Lecturer in the said Institute. According to Dr. Maria Pereira, vide her report at Exhibit P. W.11/a, she found that P. W.1 Reshma had slightly below average I. Q. , i. e. , 89 and adjustment problems. She had also placed on record the Psychological Evaluation (notes) prepared by her at Exhibit P. W.11/b. During the course of investigation, three letters came to be seized, which are Exhibits P. W.1/a, P.W.2/a and P.W.5/a. During the course of investigation, the specimen writing of respondent no.1/original accused no.1 was obtained vide panchanama Exhibit P. W.14/a in the presence of the panch witness P. W.14 Satyawan Redkar. THE specimen writing and the questioned documents were sent to the Government Examiner for his opinion. P. W.13 S. C. Lohia vide his opinion Exhibit P. W.13/c opined that the said three letters at Exhibits P. W.1/a, P.W.2/a and P.W.5/a were in the handwriting of the respondent no.1. After completing the investigation P. W.15 P. S. I. Uday Parab filed a charge sheet against the present respondents and two others for offences punishable under Sections 498a, 312 and 504 read with Section34 of the Indian Penal Code. THE learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Pernem, vide Exhibit 3 framed a charge against all the accused for the aforesaid offences.

(3.) ACCORDING to P. W.1 Reshma, her marriage was registered with the Sub-Registrar of Pernem on19th April 1995 and was solemnized as per the religious rights and customs on2nd May 1995. P. W.1 in her evidence states that after her marriage she went to reside in the house of the accused at Torsem. The accused behaved well with her for a few days after the marriage. ACCORDING to her, her parents had gifted a steel cupboard, sewing machine, utensil stand, one gold ring and one gold chain. P. W.1 Reshma states that the accused started harassing her, that is, the accused persons started finding fault with everything that she did and this harassment was because the accused wanted her to bring a refrigerator, cot and fan from her parents house. ACCORDING to her, on the date of the registration of the marriage, the accused no.1 had given a letter to her asking for a Kelvinator Refrigerator. The said letter is at Exhibit P. W.1/a P. W.1 Reshma has also stated that accused no.1 used to physically assault her by giving her kicks. This was brought out as an omission qua her report at Exhibit P. W.1/b. ACCORDING to P. W.1 Reshma, in the last week of June 1995 the accused had taken her to Vrundavan Hospital at Mapusa and had pressurized her to sign on the consent form. ACCORDING to her, she was again taken to the said hospital on28th June 1995, where the abortion was performed. ACCORDING to her, the accused no.1 had sent a letter to her sister Sushma asking her to come and take away P. W.1. ACCORDING to her, on2nd July 1995, her parents came to the matrimonial home at Torsem where the accused asked the parents to take away P. W.1 Reshma. Despite efforts at convincing the accused, the accused had not relented and, therefore, the parents had to take away P. W.1 Reshma. In this background, the report dated15th September 1995 at Exhibit P. W.1/b came to be filed by her.