VASANT KUSHA MURKUTE Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of Appellant and the learned APP for the State.

(2.) The Appellant, who is the original accused, has filed this appeal, challenging the judgment and order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Raigad, Alibag dated 22 nd September, 2005. By the said judgment and order, the Trial Court convicted the Appellant for the offences punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.200/- and, in default, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months. The Appellant was also convicted by the Trial Court for the offence punishable under section 309 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for one month.

(3.) The prosecution case in brief is that the Appellant got married with deceased Laxmibai 11 years prior to the date of the incident and stayed along with his wife and two children Darshana and Subhash. The prosecution case is that the Complainant, who is the father of the Appellantaccused left the house for the purpose of taking his goats for grazing. His daughter-in-law went to the lake for washing clothes and for taking bath. She was accompanied with her children. According to the Complainant, he heard cries of his grand-children and, therefore, he went near the lake and he was found that his daughter-in-law was lying dead and his son had made an attempt to commit suicide by causing injury to himself with scythe on his neck. According to the prosecution case, the Complainant carried the dead body of Laxmibai to his house and, thereafter, brought Vasant -Appellant herein to the house. He immediately informed one Amol Desai and asked him to contact the police. Accordingly, the police came to the spot and made an arrangement to take the accused to the hospital. Post-mortem examination of Laxmibai was performed and doctor gave an opinion that the death of Laxmibai had occurred due to cardio respiratory arrest due to hypovolumic shock due to injuries to vital vessels like carotid arteries and jugular veins of both the sides. In the meantime, the Appellant, who was taken to the hospital, tried to escape but he was arrested immediately. The accused had a contused lacerated wound on the back of his neck and incised wound on the anterior aspect of the neck.