MACHINDRA JAYWANT BHOSALE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BEING aggrieved by the judgment and order dated-3-6-1999 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Baramati, the appellant named above has preferred this appeal on the grounds mentioned in the memo of appeal.

(2.) WITH the assistance of the learned advocate appointed to defend the appellant and the learned public prosecutor we have scrutinized the record and reappreciated the evidence. The prosecution story as revealed on our reappreciation of evidence stated briefly is that : On 1-1-1998 there was a quarrel between the accused and the deceased and burn injuries were caused to her by husband of the deceased. That day the accused was drinking liquor when his wife demanded money for household expenses. On that the accused got angry and asked her to quit matrimonial home and leave children with him. It is then alleged the he poured kerosene on her body and put her on fire and then himself tried to extinguish it. The victim was rushed to the hospital where her dying declaration were recorded. Ultimately she succumbed to the injuries and therefore First Information Report was lodged in the police station and investigation was undertaken. The accused was arrested. After investigation was complete charge-sheet under section302 of IPC was filed and the accused pleaded not guilty and was therefore tried. The prosecution has examined in all six witnesses to prove its case. The accused has examined two witnesses in his support. The learned trial Judge on appreciation of this evidence came to the conclusion of guilt and therefore proceeded to convict the appellant under section302 of IPC to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life. He also convicted accused under section498-A of IPC for three years rigorous imprisonment and directed that the substantive sentences should run concurrently. It is this order which is impugned in this appeal as aforesaid.