LAWS(BOM)-2012-10-266

SULTAN NOOR MOHAMAD RANA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided On October 10, 2012
Sultan Noor Mohamad Rana Appellant
V/S
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the present appeal, the appellant has assailed the judgment and order of conviction passed by learned 1st ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Sewree, Mumbai. By the said judgment and order the appellant was convicted for commission of offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to suffer R.I. for life and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/-. The said prosecution has emerged out of charge-sheet filed by Dharavi police station as a result of investigation of Crime No. 541 of 1999 registered with said police station. The said crime was registered upon first information lodged by P.W. 1 - Zakia Abdul Rehman Ansari, sister of victim Razia, who was wife of the appellant. According to the prosecution, about ten years back prior to the incident which had occurred in between night of 18th and 19th October, 1999; Razia had married the appellant and was residing with him at Gopinath Colony, Dharavi, Mumbai. The said couple had three children out of the said wedlock. According to the prosecution Razia was residing with P.W. 1 along with kids as there was no source of income for the appellant. According to the prosecution the appellant was tailor and for certain period he had been to Saudi Arabia and returned back to India sometime before occurrence of alleged incident. He had developed habit of gambling. There were quarrels in between the couple on count of said habit of the appellant.

(2.) According to the prosecution marriage of one Mansoor Alam Ansari, cousin of P.W. 1 was to be held on 16th October, 1999 at house of P.W. 1. Razia had been to house of P.W. 1 since 10th October, 1999. The appellant used to daily visit house of complainant during said period. The appellant stayed in said house on 16th October, 1999. After marriage which was effected on 18.10.1999 the appellant was insisting Razia to return to the house. However, she was reluctant to return due to gathering of several relatives at house of her sister. According to the prosecution ultimately due to insistence of the appellant, Razia left the said house at about 9 a.m. and at that time she was wearing ear rings, gold chain and gold ring belonging to her mother. On 19th October, 1999 at about 9 a.m. brother of the appellant informed on telephone that Razia was serious and due to the same P.W. 1 along with her mother went to house of the appellant. They found that Razia was lying naked on a carpet and she was dead. There was swelling on her face particularly on the left eye, with tongue out of the lips, blood in her eyes, red and white liquid was oozing from her mouth and nose and electric wire was also found lying below head of Razia. P.W. 1 made inquiry regarding the appellant, however, nobody was knowing about him. P.W. 1 suspected of the appellant having committed murder of Razia for gold ornaments and hence lodged complaint Exhibit-10 narrating the aforesaid matters. The said complaint was recorded by P.W. 10 - PSI Minakshi Patil. The investigation was carried out by P.W. 8 Sr. PI Madhukar Chavan. During the course of investigation, post-mortem revealed that cause of death of victim was "Asphyxia as a result of strangulation". The investigating agency was not able to nab the accused for several years, ultimately, the accused came to be arrested on 21.4.2004. According to the prosecution the appellant after his arrest made statement leading to discovery and as sequel to said statement he led Investigation Officer to jeweller P.W.6 - Ramesh Jain at whose shop he had sold gold ring on 20th August, 1999. After completion of investigation the accused was charge-sheeted as narrated above and was tried by the Court of Sessions at Sewree.

(3.) The prosecution at the trial adduced oral evidence of all examined ten witnesses and so also relied upon documentary evidence. The entire prosecution rested upon circumstantial evidence. The defence of the accused was that of total denial. Significantly enough the accused during his examination under Section 313 claimed that on 17th October, 1999 some quarrel had occurred at place of marriage and he had tried to patch up the matter. He claimed being at said place on 17th October. 1999 and alone having returned home on 18th October, 1999. He claimed that at about 8 p.m. he had been to Bombay Central police station and purchased tickets of Frontier Mail to go to Meerut and left by Frontier Mail at 9.10 p.m. and reached Meerut. He claimed that he returned to Bombay after about three years and was arrested by the police in a false case. He claim that he had not committed murder of his wife. He claimed that his brother Furkhan Ahmed informed him on phone that Razia was dead.