RAMKISHAN DIGAMBAR JADHAV Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants were charged and tried for offence punishable under sections 498-A, 302 and 304-B read with section 34, Indian Penal Code, in Sessions Case No.23 of 1996 before the Additional Sessions Judge, Biloli, District Nanded. By judgment and order dated 21st September 1998 the trial Court convicted appellants accused No.1 Ramkishan, accused No.2 Digambar and accused No.5 Venkat for offences punishable under sections 498-A and 304-B read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years for offence punishable under section 304-B read with section 34, Indian Penal Code and to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to a fine of Rs.500/- each, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month each, for offence punishable under section 498- A read with section 34, Indian Penal Code. The substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently. The original accused Nos.1 to 6 were acquitted of the offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34, Indian Penal Code. The original accused Nos.3,4 and 6 were acquitted of the offences punishable under sections 498A, 304B read with section 34 Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The prosecution case, in brief, is that :--

(3.) Accused No.1 Ramkishan Digambar Jadhav is husband of deceased Vimalbai and original accused No.2 and 3 are father and mother respectively of accused No.1. Original accused Nos.4 and 5 are sister and brother respectively of accused No.1 and original accused No.6 is wife of accused No.5. The prosecution case is that in furtherance of their common intention the accused subjected deceased Vimalbai to cruelty in order to meet their unlawful demand of television, deck, one plot in MIDC area at village Ghungrala and cash of Rs.50,000/-. The prosecution case further reveals that after the marriage the accused treated deceased Vimalbai properly for two months. Thereafter Vimalbai was sent to her parental home. At that time she disclosed to the complainant Narayan (her brother) that all the accused persons were demanding her to bring cash of Rs.50,000/- and other articles. The deceased was weeping while disclosing this to her parents. The complainant had given her understanding that all the demands could not be fulfilled at one and the same time but one after another he would take care to fulfill the demands. After consoling the deceased she was taken to her matrimonial house by the complainant. The complainant Narayan had given understanding to the accused No.1 and other persons residing in the house.