PRASHANT Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal is directed against the Judgment and Order, dated 15 th July, 2008 passed in Sessions Case no. 53 of 2004 by 2 nd Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Gadchiroli. The trial Court held that the prosecution has proved that Rekha (the deceased) was subjected to cruelty by coercing her and her parents to meet the unlawful demand of Rs 1,00,000/ by the accused in furtherance of their common intention and the deceased committed suicide as a result of abetment at the instance of the accused no. 3 and 4 (Appellant no. 2 and 3 herein). The appellants (Original Accused nos. 1, 3 and 4) were convicted of the offence punishable under Section 498 A of the Indian Penal Code and were sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine in the sum of Rs. 1000/ in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 10 days. Appellants nos. 2 and 3 herein were also convicted in addition under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. Appellant no. 2 herein was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for the period of five years and to pay a fine in the sum of Rs 5000/ , in default to suffer further simple imprisonment for six months; while for the same offence, Appellant no. 3 herein was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine in the sum of Rs 1000/ , in default to suffer further simple imprisonment for 10 days.

(2.) The facts, briefly stated, are thus :

(3.) Mr.I.S.Charlewar, learned Advocate for the appellants submitted that the prosecution case in the trial Court was not proved beyond reasonable doubts as, according to him, the impugned conviction was based upon the documents (Ex.36) seized by the police from the Bank of India, Yenapur branch which were the record of Home loan application, permission granted to Shalutai Laxman Padmagiriwar by the Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat Chamorshi, Solvency Certificate issued by the Talathi, guarantee in the form of revenue extract of land Gat no. 1130/1 at Chamorshi etc.. Learned Advocate for the appellants submitted that the said documents by themselves were not sufficient to base the conviction of the appellants for serious accusations as there were no independent witnesses to sustain the Charge. According to the learned Advocate, the interested statements of witnesses from Nagpur should not have been relied upon to base the conviction in respect of the incident of suicide occurred at Chamorshi.