BABULAL BABAN JADHAO Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant was tried for the murder of his wife under Section302 of the Indian Penal Code. THE prosecution had in all examined 11 witnesses in support of the charge. A number of witnesses, including the two sons of the appellant and the deceased, did not support the prosecution case. THE evidence was circumstantial in nature. THE trial Court found that the circumstances on record were sufficient to come to the conclusion that it was the appellant who had committed the murder. THE appellant was accordingly held guilty under Section302 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life as also a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default, further R. I. for three months. THE appellant was in custody in connection with the trial from 08-11-1997 to 19-11-1998 and the said period was ordered to be set off in terms of Section428 of Cr. P. C.

(2.) THE prosecution case, in brief, is that the appellant and the deceased were not pulling well and there were to be constant quarrels between them. THE last quarrel which took place between the appellant and the deceased was dated-28-09-1997 after which the deceased had gone to the house of her elder brother-in-law, Pralhad Jadhao at Jalgaon. From there, she was brought back by her nephew on15-10-1997 to Khadki. On 04-11-1997, Lalit (PW-4), son of the appellant and deceased, left for work at about 09:00 a. m. THE appellant, deceased as also their second son Dilip (PW-3) were in the house. At about 04:40 p. m. , Dilip (PW-3) went to purchase kerosene. Landlord Suresh Chakote (PW-1) in whose house, the appellant and deceased were residing, also left at about 04:30 p. m. and at that time he heard quarrel going on between the appellant and the deceased. Suresh Chakote (PW-1) and Dilip (PW-3) were informed in bazar about the incident and they returned back. THE deceased was found lying with injury to the neck and other injuries in the pool of blood. Suresh Chakote (PW-1) and Dilip (PW-3) immediately went to Police Station and lodged the First Information Report. THE appellant had absconded and was arrested on 08-11-1997. On the disclosure made by him, the police recovered the blood stained knife from bushes. THE clothes of the appellant were attached and blood stains were found on his shirt. THE Chemical Analyser found blood of human origin on the knife as also the shirt of the appellant.

(3.) SHRI. T. A. Mirza, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, urged before us that the prosecution has duly established that the appellant was staying with the deceased in a rented room in the house of Suresh Chakote (PW-1) who saw the appellant and deceased quarrelling when he left at4:30 p. m. ; that the appellant and the deceased were the only persons present in the house at the time of incident; that when Suresh Chakote (PW-1) and Dilip (PW-3) returned home, they found that the deceased was lying in pool of blood with the injury on neck and other injuries; that the appellant was not there and had absconded and was arrested only on8th November, 1997; that on disclosure made by him, the police had recovered knife and also attached his clothes which were both found to be blood stained. According to him, the trial Court has appreciated the evidence in the light of principles applicable in that behalf and the findings do not call for any interference.