SANJAY SUBBARAO KHADE Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant herein was accused No. 1 in Sessions Case No. 77 of 1991. The learned VIth Addl. Sessions Judge, Kolhapur, vide judgment and order dated 23.8.1993 was pleased to convict the present appellant for the offence punishable under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to R.I. for one year and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default R.I. for three months. He is also convicted of the offence punishable under Section 304-B of IPC and sentenced to suffer R.I. for seven years. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order, the original accused No. 1 has preferred the present appeal. Such of the facts, necessary for the decision of this appeal, are as follows:-

(2.) P.W. - 1 Vijaymala Vilasrao Salokhe happens to be the mother of deceased Chhaya. She is complainant who had lodged the missing complaint as well as the first information report. She has deposed before the Court that after 1-1/2 month of marriage, there was ill-treatment meted out to Chhaya. The members of her matrimonial home sent her to the field of others for doing labour work. They were not giving her proper food. She was also not provided with proper clothes, hair oil, etc. That the present appellant had been to Kolhapur along with Chhaya. The couple stayed at Kolhapur with the family of P.W. - 1. The appellant was working in the workshop of Vardhamane. According to P.W. - 1, the appellant had left their house and service without informing Chhaya or the other members of family. He had returned after 15 days to fetch Chhaya back to her matrimonial home. Since her daughter started weeping and demonstrated her reluctance to return to matrimonial house as she had the apprehension that she would be again ill-treated she was not sent along with the appellant. P.W. - 1 insisted upon the appellant to send some matured persons from his family. They did not send anybody. She has deposed in consonance with the first information report. She has proved the contents of the first information report which is marked as Exhibit 14. After demise of Chhaya, P.W. - 1 received all the articles offered by them at the time of marriage or after the marriage. She has admitted in the cross-examination that before the marriage, they were aware that the family of the appellant is engaged in labor work. She has also admitted that after marriage, Chhaya had resided with the appellant for 5 days and thereafter they had come to Kolhapur. They resided at Kolahpur for about 8-10 days and then returned to Savarde. Deceased Chhaya used to accompany her husband i.e. the present appellant to the land of Mr. Kulkarni, where they were engaged in agricultural work. Within one month of marriage, the father of P.W. - 1 had visited the matrimonial house of Chhaya and had noticed that Chhaya was being sent for labour work. He felt bad as prior to the marriage, Chhaya had never done any hard work or labour work and therefore he had arranged for them to come to Kolhapur. She has further stated that the appellant could not do the work in the workshop and therefore he decided to return to Savarde. The appellant had visited Kolhapur along with one Vishnu Kulkarni to take Chhaya but she was not sent. Chhaya and her mother-in-law had also visited Kolhapur.

(3.) The prosecution has examined-