LAWS(BOM)-2012-7-263

DATTATRAYA HARI JADHAV Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided On July 18, 2012
Dattatraya Hari Jadhav Appellant
V/S
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. We have appointed Shri Arjun S. Pawar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant. He has taken us to the judgment and order of the Trial Court and the notes of evidence and other documentary evidence which is brought on record.

(2.) Prosecution case in brief is that the Appellant-Accused was suspecting his wife's chastity and used to harass her from time to time. She, therefore, came to her matrimonial house and her father had permitted the accused-Appellant and his wife to reside in one room of the house. According to the prosecution case, on 25.2.2005, when the wife of the accused went to sleep in the evening, the accused tried to strangulate her and she, therefore, rescued herself from the clutches of her husband and went to the house of neibour - Mahadu Ghodwinde. She called the wife of Mahadu Ghodwinde and one more lady and asked them to persuade the accused to behave properly and not to suspect her chastity. According to the prosecution case, thereafter, she went to sleep in the room of her sister-in-law -Reshma i. e. the wife of her brother. However, on the next day, when her son had gone to the tobacco shop to bring tobacco for his mother, the accused assaulted him with a wooden log.

(3.) The Investigating Officer had recorded a complaint, investigated the case and filed a chargesheet. The Trial Court convicted the Appellant for the offences punishable under section 302, 304, 325 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/- and, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year for the offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. He was also sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period 10 years and to pay fine of Rs. 2,500/- and, in default, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months. He was sentenced to suffer R. I. for a period of three years and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- and, in default, to suffer further R. I. for a period of three months for the offence punishable under section 325 of the Indian Penal Code. He was also sentenced to suffer R. I. for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rs. 500/- and, in default, to undergo further Rigorous Imprisonment of a period of one month for the offence punishable under section 324 of the Indian Penal Code. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.