RAFIQ AMIRHAMAJA MUJAWAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against appellant - husband's conviction by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangli for the offences punishable under Sections 201, 306 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for one year with a fine of Rs. 1000/-, rigorous imprisonment for two years with a fine of Rs. 1500/- and rigorous imprisonment for one year for the three offences on conclusion of Session trial No. 200 of 1994. Facts which are material for deciding this appeal are as under:-

(2.) The learned Additional Sessions Judge to whom the case was made over, charged the appellant and co-accused for the offences punishable under Sections 201, 304B, 306, 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Since they pleaded not guilty, they were put on trial at which the prosecution examined in all 11 witnesses in its attempt to bring home guilt of the accused persons. After considering the prosecution evidence, in the light of defence of denial, the learned Judge acquitted accused No. 2 Amirhamaja Dastgir Mujawar but convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforementioned. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant is before this Court.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No. 1 - State. With the help of both the learned counsel I have gone through the evidence on record. PW-1 Shafik Abdul Buran is a panch on exhumation of the body and inquest panchanama. Though the learned counsel for the appellant sought to point out discrepancies in the evidence of Shafik and PW-4 Madhusudan Baburao Jadhav, in fact, Shafik agrees in cross examination that he had been to place at 2:30 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. He proved inquest panchanama at Exhibit No. 10. PW-4 Madhusudan Baburao Jadhav, Executive Magistrate was present at the time of exhumation of the body. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that Madhusudan Jadhav was actually not present at the time of drawal of the necessary panchanamas and was sitting in his jeep as stated in his cross examination. Madhusudan Jadhav had stated that after exhumation he was sitting his jeep. It does not mean that Madhusudan Jadhav was not present at the time of exhumation or procedure which was carried out at the burial ground. PW-3 Kishor Ramchandra Patil, who proved photographs at Exhibit Nos. 14, 15 and 16 drawn at the time of exhumation. PW-2 Maruti Sitaram Pawar is a panch at the spot panchanama drawn up vide Exhibit No. 12.