BHAGWAN TRIMBAK AHIRRO Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants herein are convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code and are sentenced to suffer life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/- each i.d. R.I. for 2 years. They are also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 201 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to R.I. for 3 years and to pay fine of Rs. 500/- each i.d. R.I. for 6 months. They are further convicted for the offence punishable under Section 498A r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to R.I. for one year and to pay fine of Rs. 500/- each i.d. R.I. for 3 months by the Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge-II, Malegaon in Sessions Case No. 36 of 2005 by Judgment and Order dated 13/4/2004. Being aggrieved by the said Judgment and Order, the appellants have filed the present Criminal Appeal. The prosecution case in nutshell is as follows:--

(2.) The prosecution examined in all 8 witnesses to bring home the guilt to the accused. The original accused Nos. 3 and 4 examined 3 witnesses to substantiate their plea of alibi and to prove that Pushpa was being prosecuted in pursuance to the complaint of her cousin Gayatri.

(3.) P.W. 1 Ramdas Shevale happens to be the unfortunate father of deceased Pushpa. He has categorically stated that on 23/3/2005 after receipt of information that Pushpa had died due to burn injuries, he rushed to the house of Pushpa alongwith family members and relatives and he saw that Pushpa was lying in a supine condition, that rear side window of the house was removed by damaging wall. In the front door some loaded gunny bags were taken out of house. The police persons were present there and were conducting panchanama. According to him, he had lodged the report at about 11 to 11.15 p.m. The relatives of Pushpa at matrimonial side i.e. the present appellants were not present and hence, funeral of Pushpa was performed at the village of her maternal uncle. Witness is not shattered on the main aspect of the case. Most of the questions put to the witness appeared to be that of the transaction between the father and the other societies pertaining to financial transaction.