SAHEBRAO Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision is admitted. By consent, notice after admission of revision was made returnable forthwith and both the sides were heard for final disposal of the matter. The proceeding is filed against judgment and order of Sessions Case No. 153/2004, which was pending in the Court of Sessions Judge, Jalgaon. In the Trial Court, the present respondent Nos. 2 and 3 were charged for offence punishable under section 302 R/w. 34 of I.P.C. All the accused, including respondent Nos. 2 and 3 were charged for offences punishable under section 304B, 498A and 34 of I.P.C. All the accused are acquitted of these offences. Original complainant has filed the present proceedings. Heard the advocate for complainant, advocate for the accused and the learned A.P.P. The learned A.P.P. supported the original complainant. The original record is perused by this Court.

(2.) The deceased Suwarna was niece of the complainant. The father of the deceased was a real brother of the complainant and he had died 3-4 years prior to the date of incident. After the death of the father of the deceased, the mother and brother of deceased had started living with the complainant in village Saver kheda, Tahsil Raver. The deceased was given in marriage to accused No. 2 about two years prior to the date of incident. The accused No. 3 is the real brother of accused No. 2. Accused Nos. 1 and 5 are parents of accused No. 2. These accused were living together in village Vivare, Tahsil Raver, District Jalgaon. Accused No. 6 is a son of elder brother of accused No. 1 and the house of accused No. 6 is situated adjacent to the house of accused No. 1. The deceased had cohabited with the accused No. 2 in the house where the accused Nos. 1 to 3 and 5 were living together. At the relevant time, the deceased had a daughter aged about 9 months. Initially Suresh Gaikwad was working as a laboured on yearly wages basis in the field of accused No. 1 and he was made accused No. 4, but he came to be discharged. Suresh Gaikwad is examined as a witness by prosecution.

(3.) It is contended that the family of accused No. 1 had purchased agricultural land and due to that the family was in need of money. It is contended that accused were asking the deceased to bring Rs. one lac from the complainant as they were in need of money. It is contended that accused No. 6 was instigating other accused to make such demand. At the relevant time, accused No. 6 was working as Dy. Superintendent of Police and he was posted in Buldhana district. The wife of the brother of accused No. 6 had died unnatural death and it is contended that accused No. 6 used to say that he would manage everything, if something happens to the deceased, if the demand is not met with. Allegations are made that deceased was mentally harassed by the accused. Due to the threats given and the conduct of the accused, the deceased had become frightened. She had disclosed about the ill-treatment, which she was receiving, to the complainant and other relatives. The last disclosure was made about one month prior to the date of incident, when the deceased had visited the house of the complainant. Complainant had then met accused and he had tried to convince them to behave well. He had expressed that he was not in a position to meet their demand.